#1  
Old 11-05-2009, 12:55 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Best printer for astrophoto's?

I would like to start printing my astrophoto's.

Can anyone reccommend the best printer, what it costs, how expensive are refils, ink vs laser, where to get it, best value for money etc.

I would like to print up to A3 in size.

Baz.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-05-2009, 01:31 PM
rogerg's Avatar
rogerg (Roger)
Registered User

rogerg is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,542
I would recommend having them printed at a local pro photo lab instead (if you have a local one). Here in Perth the place I use, an A3 size works out about $10. Colour reproduction is perfect and quality is the great (pro, archival, etc). I'm not sure any home printer can compare in price when you add up cost of printer, ink/toner, paper.

But. .. yeah, sometimes it's nice to just print stuff at home whenever you want.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-05-2009, 01:37 PM
leon's Avatar
leon
Registered User

leon is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: ballarat
Posts: 10,825
Baz, I have recently purchased a iX 4000 Canon printer, to do just what you have said, and it is fantastic.

It will do borderless up to A3, and is reasonably economic to run, the colours are spot on, and it only needs 3 individual colour cartridges, and 1 black.

They cost about 25.00 each, but last a good lenght of time, if one is not wasteful of coarse.

I usually do a very small test print, say about 6x4 before i let it rip at A3, so that I know all is well with the colour and stuff.

The Canon iX 4000, is not cheap and cost me $600.00, but it is well worth it.

You can order one of these from any Camera House outlet, of direct from the Canon site.

Hope this helps a bit.

Leon

Ps, when it comes to laser printers, "I Know Nothing"
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-05-2009, 04:15 PM
bloodhound31
Registered User

bloodhound31 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,628
Thanks Roger and Leon.

Anyone got a word on laser printers for astrophoto's?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-05-2009, 06:25 PM
acropolite's Avatar
acropolite (Phil)
Registered User

acropolite is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Launceston Tasmania
Posts: 8,988
Baz, I use an Epson R1800, A3+ printing with pigment (paint rather then dye) based inks. The results are impressive, colour fastness is 70+ years, I haven't kept tabs but I suspect they're a little on the expensive side to run.

The R1800 has been superceded by the R1900 and R2800. Like Leon said they're not cheap, expect to pay over $1000. To get the best results you also need something to calibrate your monitor.

Last edited by acropolite; 31-05-2009 at 12:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-05-2009, 08:07 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by acropolite View Post
Baz, I use an Epson R1800, A3+ printing with pigment (paint rather then dye) based inks. The results are impressive, colour fastness is 70+ years, I haven't kept tabs but I suspect they're a little on the expensive side to run.

The R1800 has been superceded by the R1900 and R28800. Like Leon said they're not cheap, expect to pay over $1000. To get the best results you also need something to calibrate your monitor.
+1. Epson for absolute quality imho. The R1900 is quite nice, and so is the R2880 too, I was considering something even larger myself (taking sheet rolls) but since I've lost interest in photography, I can't justify the cost now.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-05-2009, 08:33 PM
Chippy's Avatar
Chippy (Nick)
Phoenix has landed

Chippy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 315
Another one for the Epsons. The R1410 is an absolute bargain if you want cheap A3+. The quality is still very good and 1/2 the price of an R1900. The 1900 is even better of course
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 13-05-2009, 01:58 PM
mdgodf (Mark)
Registered User

mdgodf is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sydney, Northern Beaches, NSW
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodhound31 View Post
Thanks Roger and Leon.

Anyone got a word on laser printers for astrophoto's?
Laser printers aren't particularly good for photos (astro or other) especially if you are concnerned about cost. A laser that would print photos as well as an inkjet is very expensive. This article from PCuser talks about it a bit http://www.pcuser.com.au/pcuser/hs2....256E8E0014ADCF

A good place to get information and materials for printing at home is http://www.imagescience.com.au/

But unless you want the fun and satisfaction of making a good print at home (I think it's worth while), which will require some effort and expense, printing at a local photo lab would be better.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 14-05-2009, 01:44 AM
ian (Ian)
Registered User

ian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Coast, NSW
Posts: 29
don't know if this is helpful, nor do i know if they do foreign orders but these guys are getting some very good press. the price seems pretty good and you upload your images via their website, the prints returned in the post. i could not see it on their website but i have read they also transfer images to ceramic tiles. maybe a nice accent to every astronomers bathroom


http://www.deepskyprinting.com
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 31-05-2009, 10:26 AM
Benny L (Ben)
Registered User

Benny L is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Carmel - Perth Hills
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpastern View Post
+1. Epson for absolute quality imho. The R1900 is quite nice, and so is the R2880 too, I was considering something even larger myself (taking sheet rolls) but since I've lost interest in photography, I can't justify the cost now.

Dave
You can get 13in rolls for smaller printers like EPSON's R2400 or 2880

I have an EPSON 7800 at the moment which does wonderful prints, before that I had the 2400 which was just as good except the ink per mL was significantly more expensive and, well 13in rolls get too small after a while

I would suggest if you had the cash to look at the EPSON 3800? Prints on 17in rolls and takes 80mL cartridges so in the long run its going to be cheaper if you do alot of printing yourself rather than taking them to a lab.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 31-05-2009, 12:47 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny L View Post
You can get 13in rolls for smaller printers like EPSON's R2400 or 2880

I have an EPSON 7800 at the moment which does wonderful prints, before that I had the 2400 which was just as good except the ink per mL was significantly more expensive and, well 13in rolls get too small after a while

I would suggest if you had the cash to look at the EPSON 3800? Prints on 17in rolls and takes 80mL cartridges so in the long run its going to be cheaper if you do alot of printing yourself rather than taking them to a lab.
Yup Ben, you are correct. I couldn't remember if the 2400 took rolls or not. I had considered the 3800 at one stage, but there's a Canon printer I was also considering (IPF 5000), which seems better quality and better value too (120ml buckets if memory serves me correct). This has now been replaced from memory, so I'm not too sure how the current range models compete. Epson is better as a general rule, except for they don't allow matte and gloss black in the damn printer at the same time...grr...

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 31-05-2009, 01:21 PM
Benny L (Ben)
Registered User

Benny L is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Carmel - Perth Hills
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpastern View Post
Yup Ben, you are correct. I couldn't remember if the 2400 took rolls or not. I had considered the 3800 at one stage, but there's a Canon printer I was also considering (IPF 5000), which seems better quality and better value too (120ml buckets if memory serves me correct). This has now been replaced from memory, so I'm not too sure how the current range models compete. Epson is better as a general rule, except for they don't allow matte and gloss black in the damn printer at the same time...grr...

Dave
haha! yea they've only just started doing the matt & photo blacks in the 7900/9900 printers
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 31-05-2009, 04:55 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
Might investigate, but by the time I commit to an expensive printer, it'll prolly be a few years. Lost all interest in photography (thanks Canon) and can't afford to switch (or justify) to Nikon. Since I'm not really doing much photography anymore, can't really justify huge expenses on printers, more efficient for me to go to a local lab at the moment.

Dave
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 11:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Celestron RASA
Advertisement
Astromechanics
Advertisement
EQ8-R
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Star Adventurer
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement