Home printing...

[Chri5]

Or should I use a lab?

I have only just recently started to try printing my photos and I mainly use Jessops but I have noticed that there prints never match what my screen shows. I am not discrediting Jessops at all as I have never had a bad experience with them and I have gotten to know the staff pretty well and they often give me discount and I am now I am fully aware that I need my screen calibrated which I am currently working towards.

I am just wondering would it be more efficient and time saving to print from home? Do any of you print from home? I was reading up on a particular photographer who I am a fan of and I see that he uses FujiFlex silver-halide paper for his prints.

Do any of you use this paper and can you recommend a good but not to expensive printer that I can maybe purchase to start a home lab so to speak?

[Manfred M]

Chris - Jessops is not doing anything wrong. Unfortunately, you are, albeit unwittingly.

Most of our computer screens are set far to bright for photo editing and this means that the files you have delivered to the printer are in fact too dark. The brightness on my own computer screen is turned down all the way, yet if I print an image it as I see it on my screen, it will end up being too dark too.

While I expect that there are some expensive technical solutions, I found that what works for me is to do lighten the image and then do test prints until I get output that looks right. So long as you continue to work in the same light levels when editing and don't touch your computer screen's controls you can always use the same amount of lightening from image to image and get consistent results.

As for the silver halide paper; this is just old fashioned photographic paper. If the photographer is doing his or her own prints, I strongly suspect that the photographer is shooting colour print film and working in a traditional "wet" darkroom with a coloour enlarger. There are some commercial photo printers that use "digital" wet process; but this is extremely expensive equipment that is aimed at commercial photo printers.

As for doing the printing yourself, this is something that I do, but unless you use a "pro" printer, with large ink cartridges, the cost of ink in consumer photo printers is extremely high and going to a commercial printer is likely to save you money.

[Polar01]

I agree almost with everything Manfred states, the difference is if you only want to print say the odd 4x6 or 5x7 than any bookshelf or desktop printer will do, make sure it has CMYK and photo black. Now the thing is the printer maker will kill you on the cost of the ink. This can actually help you to learn how to get your files ready so when you have a job that needs to be sent out you will be better able to give them the files they need. The biggest step is to know that your monitor has had the profile that was calibrated for it applied, learn to print the small images yourself, which will in-turn teach you how to provide files to outside printers.

Cheers: Allan

[Chri5]

Ok Ill give that a try. The photographer in question shoots digital though on a nikon d800 and on phase one medium format. I somehow dont think i would ever be able to afford one of those though

[Manfred M]

In that case your favourite photographer is using a lab with something along the lines of one of these Durst Theta units shown on the bottom of this page. Hardly a device that will be welcome (or affordable) in too many homes.

http://www.durst.com.sg/products.html

When I started off in the wet darkroom I bought myself a Durst M600 enlarger.

[Chri5]

Ok thanks Allen Thanks Manfred. I think ill just stick to the simpler method.

[DanK]

I agree with Manfred. I don't use that printing service (I'm on the wrong side of the pond), but the main problem is likely to be how you prepare the file for printing, not the printing service. Printing at home won't solve any of those problems. It will simply confront you with the additional tasks entailed in learning to properly control printing. These are not trivial at first.

I'd forget about doing anything until you have your monitor calibrated.

When you get to the point where your files are properly prepared, then there will be tradeoffs in deciding whether to print yourself. Manfred is right that it is usually cheaper to use a lab, but these days, you can get superb prints from very inexpensive dye-based printers, and the cost per print is not hugely higher than a lab. Red River paper has estimates by type of paper and printer, but unfortunately only in dollars.

[Chri5]

I agree with Manfred. I don't use that printing service (I'm on the wrong side of the pond), but the main problem is likely to be how you prepare the file for printing, not the printing service. Printing at home won't solve any of those problems. It will simply confront you with the additional tasks entailed in learning to properly control printing. These are not trivial at first.

I'd forget about doing anything until you have your monitor calibrated.

When you get to the point where your files are properly prepared, then there will be tradeoffs in deciding whether to print yourself. Manfred is right that it is usually cheaper to use a lab, but these days, you can get superb prints from very inexpensive dye-based printers, and the cost per print is not hugely higher than a lab. Red River paper has estimates by type of paper and printer, but unfortunately only in dollars.

Hi Dan. Can you recommend a good lab? I am in NI and i can only seem to find Jessops

[Shadowman]

I can print up to A4 size (7 colors) and will send images to lab for anything larger. I purchased the hp 7960 printer refurbished for $200.00 about a year ago to replace one that served me well for ten years. Printing at home can help you learn about the intricacies of print making, comparing your output to a lab; especially color retention. If you can find a suitable printer that doesn't drain your funds through ink usage; I'd say go for it as it's a lot of fun and frustration and you get the benefit of immediacy.

[Chri5]

I can print up to A4 size (7 colors) and will send images to lab for anything larger. I purchased the hp 7960 printer refurbished for $200.00 about a year ago to replace one that served me well for ten years. Printing at home can help you learn about the intricacies of print making, comparing your output to a lab; especially color retention. If you can find a suitable printer that doesn't drain your funds through ink usage; I'd say go for it as it's a lot of fun and frustration and you get the benefit of immediacy.

That what I was thinking. I might just but a cheaper printer and try doing both yours and the rest of the guys techniques.

[Shadowman]

That what I was thinking. I might just but a cheaper printer and try doing both yours and the rest of the guys techniques.

I found this author to be a good reference source. Fine Art Printing for Photographers is the text.

http://www.amazon.com/Uwe-Steinmueller/e/B001JOX8IW

[rpcrowe]

I don't know about the U.K. but, Canon has had some excellent prices on their upper model printers. The Pixma Pro 9000 Mkii was priced at under $150 USD when I purchased it. I like the Pixma because the Canon software makes it very easy to print. In fact, you can print a proof sheet comparing different densities and color corrections. That way, you don't have to waste several sheets of paper to get what you want. The other thing that I really like about my Canon printer is that the ink doesn't gum up and clog. I used an Epson 1800 printer and, unless I used this printer regularly, the print nozzles would frequently clog.

The Pixma 9000 Mkii was replaced by the Pixma Pro 100 and there were sales on this printer up to about a year ago. It was running about USD $200-250 and if you purchased a canon lens or camera or lens/camera combination, you got the printer virtually free.

I looked up the Pixma Pro 100 at B&H Photo and Video in New York City and there is a rebate applicable until October 3rd with the bottom line price of $149 USD after the rebate.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...to_Inkjet.html

The Pro 100 gets 4.7 out of 5 stars. If you look at the cons - it is mostly because of the size and weight of this printer. I have no idea why a printers weight should be of a concern because once it is set up you don't carry it around. If you have the space for it, then the size should not bother you either. It does print 13x11 inch prints so it could hardly be much smaller.

If you could get a price approaching this on your side of the pond, I would instantly grab it!

I also looked at Canon U.K. refurbished printers and neither the Pixma 900 Mkii nor the Pixma Pro 100 were listed. It is not surprising that the Pixma Pro 9000 Mkii was not listed because it is several years old but, I would have thought that the Pixma Pro 100 would have been listed.

BTW: I use mostly Canon paper but also use some other brands. Red River Papers work well in my printer. Staples, a local office supply store has their house brand paper which also works well.
However, when I first purchased my Pixma Pro 900 Mkii, I attempted to use the Hewlett Packard (HP) paper I had left over from my previous HP printer and that was a debacle. The prints came out wet from the printer and would not dry in a decent amount of time. Many paper companies (Ilford is one U.K. company) sell sample collections of their various type papers. I know that Ilford sample packs are available here in the USA and would assume that they are also available in the U.K. I would assume that The Pixma 100 would have the same interface with the various papers...

Finally... I like having a printer so I can make prints when I need them in a hurry. However, unless you do a lot of printing, I would recommend that you use a reasonably priced printing service. PP the image until it looks good on your monitor. Now make several additional copies each with more brightness. Have the series printed. Do this with several images and you will most likely hit a point in which you can PP an image to your likes and then prep that image for the commercial printer. Additionally, the surface of the paper makes a difference. I tend to use a brighter image to print on matte paper than I do on glossy paper. When I have a canvas print made, I make the image that I submit quite a bit brighter....

[DanK]

Chris,

I can't point you to a good lab because I am in the US. When I use a lab, I use Bay Photo in California.

I agree with Richard about the Canon printers. I used a Pro 9000II for years and now use a Pro-100. All of the paper vendors I have checked offer ICC profiles for these printers. My default papers are Moab and Red River, but I have a big stock of Canon papers that came with the package, free.

However, at the risk of repeating myself: even though I enjoy printing and print all of my own up to 13 x 19, printing your own won't solve the problem you asked at the outset. It will give you a bunch of other issues to deal with--in particular, learning how to get the software rather than the printer to control colors so that you can use appropriate ICC profiles for each paper.

[royphot]

I also agree.

Until you get your monitor calibrated and profiled, there is little chance of getting accurate prints, either from a lab or at home. Calibration devices start at around £85, (Spyder Express from Amazon).

Once you have got accurate colours showing on your Monitor, then you will be able to use the Labs Colour Profile and get an accurate print.

If you do decide to go the home printing route, there are enough print makers on here, who are able to give you practical advice.

Roy

[IzzieK]

Chris...no matter what printer you have, if you want to practice printing and will be using more ink because you need to know the difference even with paper and other medium your printer can handle, try looking into an ink system called CISS (Continuous Ink System) for your printer model. Even a UV and type is not so expensive... I have a set connected to my Epson...and since hubby is so fond of printing his stocks news, I am planning to buy him a set for his el cheapo HP printer...I think mine cost me $72 for my set. It is cheaper than buying another printer... just a thought...

[Chri5]

Thanks. I think I am just going to go down the lab route.

[Manfred M]

Thanks. I think I am just going to go down the lab route.

That being the case, and assuming that you have calibrated and profiled your computer screen you should do a couple of things.

1. Ask the lab for either the icc profiles for the printer / paper they are using (and there may be more than one of these), or ask them for the make / type of printer they are using as well as the paper types, and download the appropriate icc profiles for that printer from the paper manufacturers web site.

Load these into your editing program and soft-proof as if you were printing your own.

2. Ask the lab whether they use support AdobeRGB or not. If they do, use this colour space when preparing your image for print, otherwise stick to the default sRGB colour space for preparing for printing.

3. Work with the lab (via test prints) to calculate the amount of adjustment required to. Follow a colour-managed work flow, just as if you were printing your own. While there are "standard" lighting conditions that one should technically judge prints by, I find that indirect light in a room through the middle part of the day works just fine. Don't forget, the colour managed workflow will get the colours looking right, but you need to ensure the brightness works for you under "normal" viewing conditions.

[Chri5]

Thanks Manfred. I will do. Ive been wondering about soft proofing now I know Thanks again.

[russellsnr]

Hi, Have a look at https://www.youtube.com/user/marrutt/videos
UK based company that are very helpful.
Russ

[motordrive]

I was sending my digital files to places like Costco. They do a decent job and the price was right. A few years ago I tried using a Epson wide carriage photo printer for home printing. As it turned out we (my wife and I) were not happy with the prints. I could never get the prints quite right. This could have been a case operator error as I was not a student of home printing at the time. About a month ago I decided I wanted to control my on destiny regarding prints. I began to read up on color management and all that implies. I purchased a Canon Pixma Pro 100. Yes it is big and heavy but as the man said it's not going anywhere since I found the space for it. I am fully aware of the cost (pigment ink, etc.) and am willing to deal with it. Since I have had the printer I have experimented with two or three ways to produce a print. For the most part there is not that much difference. As a matter of fact I have printed directly from a Tiff or Jpeg file with out changing anything and the prints are quite good. As a matter of fact the Canon Print Studio Pro software that came with the printer works very well. One last thing. I do have Canon paper but I picked a box of Kirkland (Costco) Pro Glossy Photo Paper (150 Sheets) to try it out. I have a number of prints with this paper using the icc profile for Canon Photo Platinum Glossy paper and the prints look terrific. Of course my monitor is calibrated and I use an Eizo monitor but I give the credit tor the paper. In closing, yes, printing at home is more expensive but it is fulfilling.
John