Your home printing experience please...

[gobs]

Hi all,

 

I’m in the market to buy a A3 photo printer and I’ld like to know what you are using: printer, ink and paper.

And what are your experiences/thoughts about home printing.

 

As you may know, I’ve always been wet printing from B&W film in my darkroom. So when I lately began to play with my average Epson office printer (CX5500), I was very surprised by what I can get from my “small” MFT Olympus OMD EM5 digital files.

Average printer, average ink and average paper, so average pics, for sure, but…

 

Scan of a full pic on 5x7 (13x18) print:

 

Scan of a crop of above “from” a 12x16 (30x40) print:

 

Scan of a crop of above “from” a 16x24 (40x60) print:

 

Wow! With dedicated printer, ink and paper, I suspect I may get really nice 12x16 (30x40) prints.

My intent is to get a “classic/vintage” touch to the prints (at least no digital feeling, nor HDR, and so on). I’m aware much more work is needed, but I’m very pleased with these first quick drafts. I’m especially impressed with the resolution and the materials rendition (shirt fabric, bird feathers…) I can get on a 12x16 print from my “small” MFT...

 

For now I’m leaning toward a “medium-grade” Canon Pixma pro-100 A3+ printer: 11150 THB from InvadeIT, here:

http://www.invadeit.co.th/product/inkjet-printers/canon/pixma-pro-100-a3-color-inkjet-printer-p016175/

 

All thoughts and advices welcome!

Cheers,

Ray

[rhythmworx]

You might want to look into a lazer printer and silver halide paper, I have a few useful bookmarks (somewhere), I'll try and find them later, but for now I'll just post something I googled which may or may not be of interest to you.

 

https://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/hub/proLabMoments/proLabOutput/proLabOutput_article1.jhtml

 

You might also want to send a PM to 'fimgirl' who does a lot of his own prints and seems quite knowledgable on the subject of papers etc...

 

He's a Fuji shooter too, uses old Leica glass and what not.

 

 

[rhythmworx]

On further reading it seems these are more industrial type printers used by film labs. Doh

[gobs]

Thanks RAW () for your input...

Yes, though interesting, I think your link is for pro-labs. And pro, sure I'm not!

 

Just looking for quite good results to play around at home: no exhibition, no sale or whatever of this kind.

An amateur/hobbyist I am...

 

Cheers

[guzzi850m2]

My home photo printing experiences are bad.

 

The affordable inkjet printers have to be used often in order not to chock up the nozzles and the ink (4-5 colors) often cost about the same as the whole printer.

 

My current Epson L210 (A4) print okay photo's (not prime quality, but okay) but even with original ink, the prints fade away after hanging 3 month on the wall. That L210 uses tanks and I buy original Epson refill bottles, app 1000 baht for 4 refill bottles which is fairly cheap.

 

Since I am gone 2 month for overseas work 3 times per year and the printer sits unused for 2 month, the black nozzle is clogged up and no matter what I do, I can't get it to work properly anymore. When printing a test document, I have to use high quality print settings in order to get a printed test document I can actually read, <deleted>!

 

I have now bought a laminating machine and laminate my photos I hang in my man cave and they last but this is not a perfect solution as the laminating film dims the viewing experience. 

 

I am tired of printers man, too many headaches.

 

Sadly filmgirl seems to have left the forum after somebody here pissed him off.

[laislica]

Printers are the bain of my life!

We are in Spain 6.5 months, then Thailand 5.5 months.
I have an HP wireless inkjet and the ink costs as much as a new printer.

Also, just after warranty, one of the front panel buttons failed, as it does for thousands of other customers and HP don't give a damn! This stops me doing a quick photo copy or resetting the printer etc. Very frustrating.

With new cartridges, prints are OK but if you refill the cartridges, the bloody printer knows and refuses to print properly.

I am forced to buy their sh1t!

Also, If the photo is exposed to light, they fade very quickly.

So I bought a laser printer......

I haven't used it much so I can't report on it yet.

 

[samuijimmy]

I have had same problem with ink jets ... if not used much they clog up.... also find photograph print fades after a year or two, unless in an album!

Laser for B W is way to go.... my faithful HP laserjet now into it's ninth year! They don't dry up!

I think if one does not have many photographs to print, perhaps use your local Photo print shop, it's pretty cheap to do here!

[rhythmworx]

I have the same problem as guzzi with my current epson, and also the 2 before were the same and went in the bin eventually.  Shame really the discontinued 6 colour R-series made nice prints.

 

Guzzi have you tried filling a tank up with isopropanol/isopropyl alcohol and running a few prints let it rest overnight and run some more?  it may unclog.

I have the exact same issue on an xp-325, it may actually be driver related, one thing epson has always failed miserably with.

[laislica]

I firmly believe that some (Many - Most?) printer makers have software that gives the appearance of clogging if you have been topping up the cartridges. The printer counts the pages printed and guesstimates how much ink should be left. If you continue to print without replacing the cartridges, all hell starts to break loose!

Printing delays, instructions to run the head cleaning procedure, patchy printing and the odd thing is that the buggered print pattern is repeated!
If however, you are able to perform a printer reset to factory defaults, the printer forgets the serial No. of the cartridges and ones that before the reset which may have had all the above problems plus more severe warnings that the cartridges are forgeries and there is a problem with one or more -  just start working again as if they were brand new.

Funnily enough the failed front panel key on my HP, (just after warranty) stops you doing the hard reset!

I did read that they only remembered two consecutive sets of cartridge serials but that never worked for me.

I wonder if they send a download to a naught printer where the user keeps refilling the cartridges?

That would be easy to do and they could simply remove the functions from any key they wished.

 

I also hate the BS warnings that They want me to have the highest quality prints.

Generally, I don't give a damn and print in draft mode anyway!

Perfectly good enough for all the junk that the Imm for various countries that we visit/live in require!

As far as I know, the printer is mine, to use as I wish.

It's not a licensed product that can only be used under certain conditions like software is.

Phew!!!

Rant over (Till next time!!!!)

 

 

 

[gobs]

Thanks to all for your comments.

 

In fact, as I’m a “old school” guy coming from films/wet prints (I’m very new to digital photo), looking at my pics only through a screen is not enough for me. I need “the real thing” in hand and sometimes “on the wall” in my home. My idea was to compose a port-folio based on A4 format pics (8x12). Then, the “very best ones” could be enlarged to A3 (12x17).

And finally, being a hobbyist, and having hobbyist expectations for now, I decided to go with a “hobbyist printer”: a Canon Pixma iX6770, A3+ (13x19), 5 ink cartridges (Chromalife 100+). No whistles and bells, just a printer and its driver.

If one day in the future I’m becoming a better photographer taking everything more seriously, then maybe, maybe, I’ll go for a hi-end printer.

 

So this Canon Pixma iX6770 prints through the classic CMYB ink cartridges set for colours and B&W photo prints as well. The 5th cartridge (pigment black) is just here for texts (letters, reports, and so on) and doesn’t work when photo printing only. Its footprint is a bit bulky when trays are out: about 90x60x45 (cm) of space needed, and 60x30x20 (cm) when closed. The overall building is rather plasticky, though not so flimsy it seems, and at least better than my previous consumer Epson printers I feel. Only time will tell how it ages…

 

 

The printer is just a plug-and-play thing. Follow the set-up chart, then just install the driver on your PC from the CD, and everything is ready to go in less than half an hour. I loaded the input tray with “prefered” Canon photo papers, and… the very first pic was just right nice! As well the 2nd, 3rd… 5th… 10th and so on, all came spot on straight out from the printer after learning 2 or 3 adjustments tricks. The ease of use of this hobbyist machine is amazing: no need to fiddle through tens or hundreds mouse clicks. I was previously  a bit worried about that but no: just let the driver on “auto” when printing and things go smoothly: a real breeze, at least for my needs!

And what a pleasure to get a nice colour or B&w 13x19 pic at hand: very rewarding. This format is already quite large in hand or exhibited on a wall at home…

 

 

As well, I’m trully amazed by my 45mm f/1.8 Oly lens: wow, wow and wow! I’m sure I could easily get a nice 24x32 print with no problem. Really, really blown out I am…

 

The ouput quality of my B&W and colour prints are good enough for me. Not the top museum quality I know, but quite amazing coming from such a consumer grade printer. No sale nor exhibition in sight for me, so…

I printed B&W pics on Pro-matte paper and colour pics on Pro-luster paper: just what I could find here in CNX at first catch. The Pro-matte paper has a nice creamy touch and look for B&W pics with a quite good black depth for me. The Pro-luster paper rendition is a bit “semi-glossy-grainy”, not what I like the best, just OK. At the end I get a nice overall look through my eyes, though these Canon Pro-papers have a bit of plastic feeling at hand: flabby, no “firmness”. I’ll try to find some fine art papers with baryta touch and look. Maybe I’ll get in touch with AV-Camera in BKK as they have a large Ilford fine art papers range.

 

About costs, I can’t say for now for sure, but as I’m used to wet printing (not cheap), and after checking prices for this and that, I feel costs should be similar, so not a real brainer for me. As well as I only wet-printed large prints off my “best” (for me) pics, I’ll follow the same way with this printer I think…

Just to give an idea:

The printer came at THB 5999 (special price) from IT City. A full set of 5 ink cartridges is THB 2000 from a shop in Pantip Plazza (but THB 610 one by one). One pack of Canon Pro-Matte paper A3 size (12x17) 20 sheets costs THB 920 from Bug Photo Shop here in CNX.

 

 

All in all, after my first steps above I’m more than happy with my purchase. And I have to confess I was not previously expecting such beautiful results with this quite cheap printer.

Pros: everything

Cons: nothing

 

Well now I've to re-set up my office. Arf, more work in sight...

 

And cheers to all!

[godblessemall]

I agree that printers are frustrating. I use the Epson L210 with their own tanks and ink. It gives better prints than others I've tried, but needs regular use to avoid clogging. I had to take it to my computer repair dealer a few months ago because it stopped printing even though the tanks were full.

 

They told me that it counts how many times it prints and then has to be reset. I hate the way these companies try to force you to do what they want and not what you want. Like they say about iphones... you only think you own it but actually they tell you to use it as they want ... that's why I go Samsung.

 

I tried Canon before but although they do not clog so much with long intervals between use, their print quality isn't so good, and I changed after the print head was worn out for the second time. Over a thousand each time for a new head for a printer costing 3000+. Epson have always had better quality at more cost.

 

A few years ago I used Epson printers which had special ink cartridges with a chip in them . They told you they were empty and stopped printing, but you could get a chip re-setter which told the printer the cartridge was full again.

 

I could then run them dry before changing to a new cartridge, but you had to be careful to refill right away and get the ink flowing through the tubes to the heads. Obviously it was designed to allow for idiots (most of the general public) who didn't know much and to prevent them running dry, but the chip would report that the cartridge was empty when actually only 2/3rds empty.

 

A big waste of ink and they were expensive too. The good thing was that the ink was a special long life which didn't fade... they claimed 70 years archival. I would compare it to water color paint as compared with oil paint. The usual printer ink was dye based whilst this was resin based. Certainly I could hang a print outdoors in sunlight and even after a year it didn't fade.

 

It was costly and also dried up in the tubes quicker so you had to be printing almost daily to avoid problems. I don't know if they still sell that kind of ink but it certainly wasn't meant for joe public in cost or useage.

 

Perhaps the new Epson system of counting pages is designed to get past the trick of chip resetting by users. These people do their best to close any loopholes the public find to stop being cheated.

 

Edited November 24, 2016 by samuijimmy
Spaced for easier reading!

[gobs]

Ok, guys: a quick Canon Pixma iX6770 printer update...

 

 

After my first steps with my new printer, I get some estimated print prices. Please, don't take these as "absolute" figures: these are just some quick computations to get an idea...

Printer driver sets to “auto-standard” (a bit like “program-normal” for a compact camera maybe) for 4 x A3 (12x17) B&W prints and 6 x A3+ (13x19) colour prints (in different print formats), I get the following figures:

 

Inks…

C: emptied 40%

M: emptied 30%

Y: emptied 20%

BK: emptied 25%

Total ink cost is about THB 720.

 

Paper…

Canon Pro-Matte A3, 4 sheets

Canon Pro-Luster A3+, 6 sheets

Total paper cost is about THB 635.

 

Total: THB 1355 for 10 A3/A3+ prints (or equivalent smaller formats).

That’s about THB 135 for one 12x17/13x19 print, or about US$ 4…

Not so bad IMHO, though not being “museum grade” prints I agree, but beautiful A3 consumer prints, printed with Canon good grade inks on Canon good grade photo papers.

 

Here is a print framed in a 30x40 (12x17) frame I had left over: beautiful enough for a “home show” IMHO.

 

 

However, while a 30x40 print seems large in hands, it seems not so “hudge” once hanged in place on a wall. For a real wow-factor print on a wall, I think A2 format (17x24) would be better. But A3 is good enough for a mixed formats “average exhibition wall” in home…

 

As a note, I met a tech guy in CNX Pantip Plazza who modifies this printer from 5 ink cartridges into 5 ink bottles with aftermarket inks. Cost of modification on the printer is THB 1000, full 5 ink bottles included. When I asked he agreed that ink quality is not the same but “very near, maybe 90%” (his own words). I forgot to ask cost for a full 5 inks refill only…

As well in CNX PP, a lot of aftermarket photo papers in different qualities and formats (up to A3) at a far lower cost than Canon ones. But what about print quality?

For my part, and by my expectations/needs, I think I’ll stay with Canon brand inks and papers: I’ll not print a lot of pics, just my best ones (for me), so…

 

Cheers!

 

[gobs]

A bit more about print prices...

 

After a quick search it seems a 30x40 (12x16) inkjet colour print (close to A3) from a digital file printed in a lab is sold about THB 300. Paper quality is usually only specified as glossy photo paper, no brand, no grade...

That's to say the difference between a out serviced A3 print and a home printed A3 print from the printer above is about:

300 - 135 = THB 165

As I bought this printer THB 6000, I must at least print 6000 / 165 = 36 A3 prints to get cleared of my "investment cost". If I use it, let's say, 3 years, I have to print one A3 print each month. Or 2 A4 (8x12) prints, or 4 A5 (6x8) prints or 8 A6 (4x6) prints...

Not so impressive IMHO: pricewise, I think I can do with that. At least I'll get what I like about paper quality and global rendition.

And even more invaluable: a lot of fun!

 

But ok, just my opinion...

[gobs]

Finally, my first thoughts through my own experience…

 

After having printed family style pics and some of my own “work”, in B&W or coulours, I feel owning a photo printer is worthy, really. To my eyes, prints deliver much more presence and “speak” much more than pics watched on a screen.

As well, as through film and wet prints, I feel (digital) printing is part of the photography process. And this is important for me: holding in hands what I’ve seen/shot through the finder, though not being an expert. Like the plain feeling of a true finished and due process.

But maybe this feeling comes from my use to shoot films and process wet prints…

 

It seems to me too that prints give a better rendition of the lenses used. It especially applies to some of my vintage lenses which better show their “character” once pics are printed. On a screen things were not so “noticeable” to me…

Also, on A3+ (13x19) prints I can better notice the global rendition difference between my Oly 12-50 zoom kit lens and my 45 f/1;8 fixed lens. Much more than on a screen by any point: colours, details, contrast, sharpness, etc... Not that the 12-50 zoom is bad on enlarged prints: it really is a very good lens for overall photography (I especially think about travel pics, street pics, candid shots, “macro” fun, etc) and prints come very nicely on 13x19 papers. However prints looked at close distance,  it’s like tiny details are a bit subdued, while the 45 f/1.8 lens seems to desplay details point to point, giving a crisper overall image. Also, the 45 f/1.8 shots could be much more enlarged than A3+ I guess.

 

One thing I was missing with screen watch only, is the 3D effect: a kind of a “flat pic effect” if I may say on screen. On some shots, once printed, the apparent-depth feeling is truly effective, something I was not even aware before printing the said pics. Watching at some prints one really feels a hand may be put into the image and its fingers rounded around some poping elements or grab a detail. It’s surprising for me how some kind of “still truth” may be rendered to this point on a digital print while it’s missing on a screen!

 

Some average A3+ print examples…

 

- A candid market pic shot with the 12-50 kit lens on Canon Pro-Luster paper:

Once printed, colours and atmosphere are well rendered, details are good enough for a very very nice A3+ home-show print. The 2 persons are well put forward the background and we get the “true” feeling that the RHS seller realy bends over towards us. On a screen, not so…

 

- A candid street pic shot with the 45 f/1.8 lens on Canon Pro-Luster paper:

Once printed, the pic exhibits a great overall rendition: colours, details, contrasts and depth make it a wonderful print (for me). We get the feeling we can put our hands on the back of the 2 persons, or grab the black hat by hand. On a screen, not so…

 

- A B&W street candid pic shot with the 45 f/1.8 lens on Canon Pro-Matte paper:

Once printed, and though I strongly edited my B&W pics before printing, details, sharpness and depth are very nice (though black is a bit weak maybe due to the 4 CMYK inks only?). The LHS young man’s right shoulder, shirt and arm, as the RHS guy’s back, gently pop out or round/curl forward out of the print giving an incredible touch and depth feeling. On a screen not so…

 

Well, finally, after my first steps in digital photo printing I’m very happy. Ok my A3+ printer is an entry level one, and maybe I only get “entry level” A3+ prints and look, but then I’m amazed with my first print results. I can’t tell enough the pleasure I get from my prints compared to the same pics only watched through a screen.

It’s a big step forward for me to enjoy even more my candid pics. 

 

All this IMHO, of course!

 

Question please: Is this lack of “3D effect”, or apparent depth, usual with digital pics watched on a screen compared to the same pics watched once printed, or is my average screen not good enough?

 

Cheers