Thinking of Doing My Own Digital Printing: Advice Needed on Best Home Printer

[ajohnw]

I'm pretty sure the banding is actually ripples in the paper caused by the anti curl being active. I think it deliberately miss feeds round one of it's rollers to cause the paper to bend the other way so that normal paper ( photo copier etc) comes out flat.

Won't be finding out though until I get my head round tying up image size and pixel count with printer resolution. On the latter I am stuck with 600x600. The printer will actually do 600x2000 odd but being on Linux it runs through CUPS which probably says we aren't having any of that here. It's actually a postscript printer as far as the system is concerned. There is also and option to force rasterisation. I suspect the best answer and easiest option where max resolution is needed is to print a full res image which comes out at about 4ft x 3ft on a screen.

John hit on why I thought Xerox might be a good source of paper. The one thing I missed on the laser which we bought a few months ago is that Samsung haven't designed a separate singe sheet feeder into it. These usually avoid many of the rollers. I generally use Samsung printers because they take the trouble to provide linux drivers. When I bought the previous one it didn't work. Emailed them and a new driver was provided 1 week later. We had that one for over 10 years without problem even at the end when it went into a skip. One toner was rather low. They aren't cheap so we thought it best to change then. As usual they only come with part full cartridges new 700 pages rather than 1000 on the new one. 1,500 pages monotone. There are 4 colour cartridges. They use black to augment blacks. Worst wear out time should be more than 6000 colour pages. 24000 in mono. I've binned several inkjets well before they reached those sort of numbers. All in all I think it's worth trying to sort it out and comparing results with my son's HP inkjet. Initial impressions are no difference. He has just seen the spider print.

John


The 600x600 may not sound much but for print viewing at 250mm 800 odd should be sufficient and after all from memory screens are a mere 100 odd.

John

[John Morton]

Won't be finding out though until I get my head round tying up image size and pixel count with printer resolution. On the latter I am stuck with 600x600. The printer will actually do 600x2000 odd but being on Linux it runs through CUPS which probably says we aren't having any of that here. It's actually a postscript printer as far as the system is concerned. There is also and option to force rasterisation. I suspect the best answer and easiest option where max resolution is needed is to print a full res image which comes out at about 4ft x 3ft on a screen.

The 600x600 may not sound much but for print viewing at 250mm 800 odd should be sufficient and after all from memory screens are a mere 100 odd.

John

Hi, John;

I do all of my printing to my color laser from InDesign, because it has an "Optimized Subsampling" option in the Print menu that drastically reduces the size of the file sent to the printer, and I have never been able to see any difference in the output (except that it takes A LOT longer to print an image without using Optimized Subsampling).

My printer will go up to 1200X1200 dpi but I usually have it set at 600X600 dpi; and actually, I tend to send it files that are saved at 300X300 dpi. I tried at first (with images from scanned 35mm film) printing full resolution files but didn't see any difference in my tests between full resolution and lesser file sizes. I do turn off color management for InDesign and specify that the printer does all of the calculations in converting RGB into CMYK print files; so maybe (as you note of your printer) it is also interpolating my files up to its full resolution no matter what I send it.

[ajohnw]

Thanks for the info John. If I was super critical of the print I obtained against the screen image I would note that the darker areas of the spider aren't so dense in places. The blacks on the spider itself match. Which is correct? Hard to say especially as I am running a slightly extended gamut on my monitor. It's a cross between adobe and sRGB. It wouldn't surprise me if the printer has a larger dynamic range either. One thing for sure on photo reproduction this one 10 years on from when the other one was bought has improved all round and the other was pretty good. Just hope I don't decide I must have an A3 one with higher resolution. It prints in that curious row staggered fashion that some sensors and camera screen use and claim double the resolution. Not measured but the dot spacing does seem to be 600dpi anyway.

-

[kiara22]

Hi,

If you are looking for Business Cards Online Australia so before buying any printer first you have to decide what type of printer you have to purchase.

There are basically three types of printers:

1. Inkjet Printer
2. Laser Printer
3. Dye-sublimation

So after selecting your printer type then you can purchase it easily according to your choice.
There are various home printers are available online which you can use easily.

Thanks

[Acorn]

Colour laser printers are a non-starter for me and I would advocate an inkjet printer, my preference being for a Canon model. For prints up to A4 I use a Canon Pixma MG7150 in conjunction with Permajet "Oyster" paper and get very acceptable results that match pretty close to my "Spyder" calibrated screen. The printer uses six separate colours including two blacks and a grey and I always stick to OEM inks. Non OEM inks are considerably cheaper but when I used an Epson printer I encountered frequent clogging of nozzles.

[davidedric]

Mmm. My spam detector just went off. Maybe I'm mistaken, of course.

Dave

[DanK]

Check the time stamps, folks. This thread had been dormant for over 5 years before kiara22 posted.

[Shadowman]

I don't mind responding to old threads especially if the images are still attached, yes should check the date stamps but why not make it (the thread) your own.

[rpcrowe]

What happens is that when you use "find" to locate threads on subjects, often these old threads are brought up.

I also like the Canon Pixma Pro 9000 Mkii printer because of the fact that the Canon ink doesn't clog as frequently as some other brands. I print only so often and was always having problems with Epson ink clogging.

The 9000 Mkii and now the Canon Pixma Pro 100 can be had very inexpensively since they (as mentioned above) have often been included as bundles. In fact, I am switching over from the 9000 Mkii to the 100 because I got the new printer as part of a bundle when I purchased my Canon 6D Mkii camera.

Ink is always a problem and is quite expensive unless you have a setup with ink tanks. But, that is only worthwhile if you print in great quantities.

Using third party inks reduces the cost considerably but, I have no great experience with using those inks and cannot remark on the quality of the prints when using any but manufacturer's OEM inks.

In fact, IMO, home printing is not a way to save money. The customization of the prints and the immediacy of getting the print when I want it makes it worthwhile for me to print at home.

BTW: I really like Canon's printing program when using the 9000 Mkii and will also probably use it with my new 100. I have not had the time to set up the 100 yet.

Finally, we use Brother laser printers for our non photo print work. I have a Brother B&W laser printer that has been chugging along for over five years and has printed many-many thousand pages. Getting paper on sale (reams or cases of paper are often loss leaders at office supply stores) and using third party LINKYO toner, I can print double sided pages for about a half cent a page. Since most user manuals come on CD these days and since I feel more comfortable with a printed manual, I usually print out user manuals and have them spiral bound at a print shop. We also print our adoption applications, and other documents that do not require color, using my B&W laser printer.

My wife has a Brother color laser printer with which we can do brochures for our dog rescue operations among other projects. These brochures look quite professional but, I have not been able to produce decent quality large size photo prints using this laser printer. I am not saying that quality photo type prints could not be produced using the laser printer but, I would have to expend a lot of effort to get it set up correctly.

[Shadowman]

Interesting take on home printing, what size cartridges does the Pixma use? Supposedly larger sized cartridges saves you some money, only issue is the cost to replace all. I've never calculated the cost of ink on a small format printer but my hp 7960 used three 24ml cartridges and they cost ($19, 25, and 40) when purchased directly from the manufacturer.

[rpcrowe]

About $120.00 or so for a full set of 7 ink cartridges. I cannot really tell you how many prints this will do. Canon says about 350 but, I think fewer...

I purchased a set of third party inks but, never used them. At 1/10 the cost of OEM Canon inks, it would be worth a try.

Here's an example: https://smile.amazon.com/LD-Canon-Co...pixma+9000+ink

[Shadowman]

About $120.00 or so for a full set of 7 ink cartridges. I cannot really tell you how many prints this will do. Canon says about 350 but, I think fewer...

I purchased a set of third party inks but, never used them. At 1/10 the cost of OEM Canon inks, it would be worth a try.

Here's an example: https://smile.amazon.com/LD-Canon-Co...pixma+9000+ink

I see your cartridges are 14ml in volume so the cost of ink, minus cartridge cost, shipping etc. is lets say $1.00 per ml, for my hp 7960 the cost would be about $1.16/mil. For my wide format printer which uses 200ml cartridges the cost of ink would be about $0.47/mil. Granted, if the cost of the cartridge etc. were eliminated actual price of ink would be lower, however if you are using a refillable system then whatever price you're paying for ink would be more accurate. Also, in order to get to that $0.47/mil cost you have to invest in a more costly printer.

[DanK]

I have frankly never understood using non-OEM inks, except in the rare cases where a vendor's inks have been carefully tested and found to be high quality and durable.

For estimates of the per-print cost of printing, see this: http://www.redrivercatalog.com/cost-...-printing.html. They no longer list the Pro 9000II, which hasn't been produced for some time, but they do have the Pro-100, which I have been using for a few years. I'll use that as an example.

If you go to the Pro 100 page (which will also give you a description of the testing method), you will find that their estimate is that the cost of ink for an 8 x 10 print is $0.875, assuming a cartridge cost of about $15. Let's say that a given non-OEM ink is half the price. Why would I spend thousands of dollars on equipment and often hours on a given print and then select a cheaper ink to save less than half a dollar?

I know there are some non-OEM inks that are considered high quality. I don't use an Epson, but various Epson users have posted here about some they use. However, early in my time printing with a 9000ii, I looked for test results for non-OEM inks. I couldn't find many, and some of the few I found were quite bad in terms of fade resistance. So the choice, it seems to me, is gambling on a cheaper ink about which I know nothing to save 50 cents or to use the OEM Pro 100 inks, which have been tested and found to be the more durable of the dye-based inks. Seems like a clear choice to me. Then again, I don't print all that much.

The difference in price across paper types, even within a manufacturer, can be greater than that. For example, for 8 x 10, one of Red River's metallic papers costs $0.72 per sheet more than their primary matte paper. You don't often read about people factoring cost into their choice of papers.

Maybe it's because I still remember--not at all fondly--the years when I sent color film to labs, but printing costs don't seem all that high to me. I hated using labs. Mostly, I wanted to have my hands on the process, as I did with B&W, but I had no access to a color darkroom and couldn't at that time make my own. But the prints were also expensive. When I switched to digital, I was pleasantly surprised by how much less expensive color prints are. My default paper is Moab Exhibition Luster. For an 8 x10, it costs about $0.78 per sheet. So using Red River's estimates, an 8 x 10 print costs me about $1.66, using Canon inks. That's quite a bargain compared with what I used to pay, particularly after factoring in inflation.

[Manfred M]

Dan - many years ago, shortly after I got into serious photography, I was lucky enough to get to know a commercial photographer who had been hired by the school board to run my high school's audio visual department and to teach night school photography courses offered by the local Board of Education. He mentored me for about 3 years and during my last year at high school, the Board offered colour photography courses.

The chemistry had a short shelf life - some if it would last a day others up to around a week, so it would have to be thrown out before the next class. Rather than throwing it out right away. I could use the left-over chemistry after the course, but had to supply my own paper. This was a super bargain because the colour processing kits were quite expensive. Regardless, I learned both positive and negative film development as well as negative and reversal colour printing. You are correct. Compared to the cost of a modern ink jet print; I was paying about the same for a sheet of colour photographic paper then as I am today for a sheet of photo inkjet paper. I suspect the cost of the chemistry, if I had been paying for it, would be about the same as I pay for OEM ink. In the case of specialty products like Cibachrome (later Ilfochrome) paper and chemistry, it was costing me far more than what I pay now. This was in the early 1970s, so factor in the cost of inflation, the costs back then were easily an order of magnitude higher than they are today.

When it comes to people I know who use third party inks / continuous ink systems; they are producing for the low-end market (images at car or horse shows, for instance). Anyone that I know who prints their own in the fine art side or higher end portraiture market sticks to the OEM inks because they cannot afford to have clients coming back to them with fading prints that the client paid a lot of money for.

[Shadowman]

This video is a year old but has information for Canon Pro series printer users to calculate costs of printing. It's useful when comparing costs of home printing versus lab costs, there is so much more invested (initial cost of printer, shipping of prints, labor (yours)) with home printing that's not calculated though. When I first got into digital photography my cost/benefit analysis included the cost of home printing, at the time I was happy with 4 x 6 and 8 x 10 so my analysis included the cost of developing film and printing from home; I don't think the local pharmacies were doing digital prints when I first got into digital.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPhk64b1aes

[royphot]

Dan - many years ago, shortly after I got into serious photography, I was lucky enough to get to know a commercial photographer who had been hired by the school board to run my high school's audio visual department and to teach night school photography courses offered by the local Board of Education. He mentored me for about 3 years and during my last year at high school, the Board offered colour photography courses.

The chemistry had a short shelf life - some if it would last a day others up to around a week, so it would have to be thrown out before the next class. Rather than throwing it out right away. I could use the left-over chemistry after the course, but had to supply my own paper. This was a super bargain because the colour processing kits were quite expensive. Regardless, I learned both positive and negative film development as well as negative and reversal colour printing. You are correct. Compared to the cost of a modern ink jet print; I was paying about the same for a sheet of colour photographic paper then as I am today for a sheet of photo inkjet paper. I suspect the cost of the chemistry, if I had been paying for it, would be about the same as I pay for OEM ink. In the case of specialty products like Cibachrome (later Ilfochrome) paper and chemistry, it was costing me far more than what I pay now. This was in the early 1970s, so factor in the cost of inflation, the costs back then were easily an order of magnitude higher than they are today.

When it comes to people I know who use third party inks / continuous ink systems; they are producing for the low-end market (images at car or horse shows, for instance). Anyone that I know who prints their own in the fine art side or higher end portraiture market sticks to the OEM inks because they cannot afford to have clients coming back to them with fading prints that the client paid a lot of money for.

That last paragraph is rather a sweeping statement. Lyson inks. for refilling cartridges or use in cis systems, are not cheap, but they are much less expensive than OEM Cartridges. The quality of those inks is at least as good as OEM. No matter which inks are used all colour images will fade to some extent, over time. So far I have not noticed any of my Prints fading, and I made my first inkjet print in 1999. If you ever purchase a "Giclee" artwork, it will almost certainly carry a warning on the rear about possible fading.

[Manfred M]

That last paragraph is rather a sweeping statement. Lyson inks. for refilling cartridges or use in cis systems, are not cheap, but they are much less expensive than OEM Cartridges. The quality of those inks is at least as good as OEM. No matter which inks are used all colour images will fade to some extent, over time. So far I have not noticed any of my Prints fading, and I made my first inkjet print in 1999. If you ever purchase a "Giclee" artwork, it will almost certainly carry a warning on the rear about possible fading.

Not all that sweeping; "When it comes to people I know"; that is my disclaimer. One does horse shows and prints at the show and another does car shows. I also knew someone who used third party inks who did shots of children at sporting tournaments (i.e soccer), but have lost contact with him. All the people I know who are into "fine art" prints, portraiture work and wedding photography use OEM inks or go to commercial custom printers that do so. In one or two cases, they go to a supplier that does not use ink jet technology, but rather high speed production printers (dye sublimation, UV cure, etc.)

Are the third party inks as good or better than the OEM inks? Frankly I don't know and that is the problem. The OEMs work with a reputable testing outfit; Wilhelm Imaging Research. http://wilhelm-research.com/


I had a different experience than you did with third party inks early in my ink jet printing days. These were dye based inks and fading / colour shift was noticeable in less than a year. Your experience has obviously been different than mine.

The warnings on fading on fine art glicee prints make perfect sense as the display environment has a significant impact on print life, regardless of the ink and paper used.

For the amount of printing I do; somewhere between 100 - 200 prints per year; it's not worth the risk to me personally given the unit cost of a print. It is still one of the lowest cost activities I have in photography. The cost of mounting or matting / framing are far higher than the cost of producing the print.

[Shadowman]

When you look at the Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for Epson inks the percentage of ingredients sometimes don't add up to 100%, so for those that don't what's the filler; is it air, sponge, something else? So it makes you wonder what ingredients the third party manufacturer's are using.

[Shadowman]

Ordered my first set of full capacity inks for my Epson P5000, it took a total of 4 weeks to receive all of the cartridges, a few of the cartridges arrived within days and the others trickled in over the last couple of weeks; luckily I had enough in the starter cartridges to keep me printing. I had already filled a favorable survey for the retailer and I really didn't have a complaint with the order process; however if I had been in a pinch for ink this long wait would not have been a good experience. The lesson for me is to look for another source of inks and also monitor my ink levels to be able to pre-purchase supplies.