Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Equipment Discussions
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 14-10-2011, 05:36 PM
PCH's Avatar
PCH (Paul)
Registered User

PCH is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 2,313
Which Laser Printer

Hi All,

does anyone have any comment on which colour laser printer will work well for photography. Mainly terrestrial is what I'm thinking. I know these things have much lower starting prices now than they used to, but I've read some reviews that suggest the cheaper models aren't much cop for photo quality output.

So I was just wondering if anyone out there has any experience.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 14-10-2011, 05:46 PM
g__day's Avatar
g__day (Matthew)
Tech Guru

g__day is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,888
Absolutely,

Use a $800,000+ plus one that you don't need to own. Many shops - e.g. Harvey Norman have uber-high level MFDs, and have regular print for 5-20 cents a photo deal. You can't buy photo quality paper at that price.

Seriously batch up your shots then go to a major store - download 100 of your best images and pay $20 to get them all printed.

This is seriously far better value than a $400 - $4,000 colour printer.

Matthew
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 14-10-2011, 07:45 PM
Marke's Avatar
Marke (Mark)
Registered User

Marke is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,193
Laser printers are useless for photos , best photo printers are Epson with
archival inks and they have full industry support for custom profiles ect.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 14-10-2011, 07:52 PM
Barrykgerdes
Registered User

Barrykgerdes is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beaumont Hills NSW
Posts: 2,900
Colour Laser printers using normal toners don't have the tonal range that some of the proffesional ink jets that use six colour cartridges. However the more expensive ones can print on photographic paper and do a pretty good job.

I have recently bought a Brother 4570 that does an acceptable job as far as I am concerned but I did not buy it for photography.

Like Matthew says the photo print shops can print very good photos from your software at a fraction of the price that it costs your home installation.

I did a cost analysis some years ago and the cost of a A4 size photo was would be in the vicinity of $5.00 providing the the printer used the ink before the cartridge failed. I had a couple of prints that actuall cost closer to $20 each considering I only got 5 useful prints from a set of cartridges. I do admit that I was doing a restoration job on an old photo that needed a lot of TLC and trial runs.

Barry
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14-10-2011, 07:57 PM
g__day's Avatar
g__day (Matthew)
Tech Guru

g__day is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,888
A Canon Pixma will likely give you the best experience if you must print at home, but it won't be nearly as good or cheap as a high-end MFD.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 14-10-2011, 09:41 PM
PCH's Avatar
PCH (Paul)
Registered User

PCH is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 2,313
Matthew, Marke and Barry,

thanks so much for those tips and suggestions. I had considered just going to HN or BigW as you suggest. Thinking about it more seriously in the light of your suggestions does make it seem the cheapest and most reliable option hey!

I'm not game to spend a fortune, so I'll just stick with a combination of going to the shops, and using the Epson (6 cartridge) RX350 that I already have.

Thanks guys. Problem solvered
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 14-10-2011, 11:50 PM
naskies's Avatar
naskies (Dave)
Registered User

naskies is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
Hi Paul,

It really depends upon what your goals are: convenience, quality, economy, or a combination of the three? My personal goals are quality first above all else, then convenience, then economy.

I use a Canon iPF6100 large format inkjet printer that takes rolls (or sheets) of paper up to 24 inches wide, and has 12 tanks of 130 mL inks (= 1560 L of ink... most cheap home ink jets might have about 80 mL in total).

This is pretty much what you get from pro labs that produce "fine art" prints via inkjet - they're pigment inks and are considered archival quality (supposedly up to 100-200 years with proper storage).

Have a look at the photos of the prints in this review of that printer:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/r.../ipf_6100.html

I've measured my average consumable cost to be about $2.50 per square foot (30x30 cm) - which includes ink ($1/sq ft), high quality fine art paper ($1.25/sq ft), and amortised printer maintenance ($0.25/sq ft for print heads, ink used in cleaning, etc). This is about 25% - 30% of what it would cost me at a typical pro lab - but only if the print volume is reasonably large.

Overall, I'm very happy I decided to print at home. I get virtually instant feedback (think of film vs digital - but in reverse) so I can experiment with processing techniques and see the effect within minutes. Since it's so cheap for me (< $4 for a 12x18 print) if a print doesn't work for any reason, I happily bin it without further thought and fix it. The look on people's faces when they see the quality (and sheer quantity) of the prints is fantastic

Main things to take note:

* Post-process your photos with an appropriately calibrated monitor with the right white balance and brightness for your target viewing conditions.

* Home inkjet printing is extremely expensive on a "cost per printed area" basis if you don't do print a lot using a large format printer.

* Convenience with home printing is unbeatable - from waking up the inkjet to being fully packed up, a 24x36 inch print takes me less than half an hour.

* Laser printer quality isn't comparable to ink jets... but they're really fast and really cheap (for what you get). On my colour laser, it takes about 30-45 seconds to go from sleep mode to finish printing an A4 page in full colour for less than $1. I use it for proofing and for making quick and dirty prints for the family fridge, etc.

* High quality inkjet prints at home are a lot of work - if you want quality, you pretty much need to treat "photo printing" as a hobby in its own right (i.e. dedicate the time to learn and practice). It's NOT a simple matter of "photo goes in, perfect print comes out"!

* A "good" print depends upon having a good source photo, the right processing, a good choice of paper, proper sealing and mounting, appropriate viewing conditions (lighting, location, viewer distance), etc. Think of the difference between studio lighting versus normal room lighting - there's also a big difference in viewing prints.

* Printer maintenance and ICC colour profiles have a huge effect on quality - that's why low-end stores with high-end equipment still produce bad prints. For example, when I first started printing I discovered that everything below RGB value 40 was being rendered as pure black (everything else looked good, though). It turned out to be a bad profile combined with the wrong ink saturation setting on the printer... resulting in a loss of 16% of the number of shades of grey I could print at!

Anyway, I hope this gives a bit of insight... feel free to ask away if I can answer any questions

Dave
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Printer-2.jpg)
50.4 KB15 views
Click for full-size image (Printer-3.jpg)
46.5 KB16 views
Click for full-size image (printer.jpg)
91.5 KB19 views
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 15-10-2011, 04:53 PM
Poita (Peter)
Registered User

Poita is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NSW Country
Posts: 3,586
Hi Paul, i
it would take a lot of prints to get back just the $6000 purchase cost of the Canon, and you eat up a lot of $$ when you first get one calibrating and doing test prints etc. You get full control, but as stated, you need to do a *lot* of printing, and even then the tilt needs to be heavily towards a lot of large format printing to be able to get to the point where it saves you any money over getting a lab to do it. (i.e. 120,000 prints to break even if you were saving 5c a print. If you were saving 2 bucks a print, it still would be 3,000 prints before you pull ahead)

I'd get friendly with the local lab, really get to know them and chat about calibration and so forth and ensure they do a quality job on your prints, and stick to using your Epson for the occasional home print (the one you have does a great job when calibrated and on the right paper) and get the rest done at the lab.

If you are doing large art prints, and are a stickler for quality and enjoy the process (or can sell the prints for more) then the Canon large format printers are the business.

Hey Dave, reckon your printer could print replacement side-art for my pinball machine
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 15-10-2011, 07:11 PM
naskies's Avatar
naskies (Dave)
Registered User

naskies is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poita View Post
Hi Paul, i
it would take a lot of prints to get back just the $6000 purchase cost of the Canon, and you eat up a lot of $$ when you first get one calibrating and doing test prints etc.
Yep, I almost fainted over the amount that Canon Australia charges. The planets must have aligned for me (huge Canon rebate, end-of-line discounts, great Aussie dollar, cheap shipping, etc)... it cost me a grand total of $2350 AUD to have a new printer air freighted from New Jersey to Brisbane (including GST & brokerage)!

A big benefit for me is that due to the low cost per print, I'm inclined to print more than I ever would have before. For example, as a thank-you present I recently made a set of thirty 12x18 inch prints (of photos I took) and presented them in an archival storage folio - there's no way I would have done that with commercial printing.

Quote:
I'd get friendly with the local lab, really get to know them and chat about calibration and so forth and ensure they do a quality job on your prints, and stick to using your Epson for the occasional home print (the one you have does a great job when calibrated and on the right paper) and get the rest done at the lab.
Great advice. If you're really interested in quality, I also recommend setting aside a budget to "blow" on experimentation - i.e. use the best papers at a pro lab, and print lots of different pictures using different post-processing that you don't necessarily want to keep/frame.

The gamut of printers and monitors is drastically different - no printer I've seen replicates the glow from backlighting well. Likewise, the reds and yellows I get from my printer are well beyond what my monitor produces (confirmed using my Spyder3).

I highly recommend Image Science (I have no affiliation other than as a customer): http://www.imagescience.com.au

Quote:
If you are doing large art prints, and are a stickler for quality and enjoy the process (or can sell the prints for more) then the Canon large format printers are the business.
Yep, I think most of the non-photo lab users of large format printers (Canon, Epson, HP) are professional photographers who would make back the cost of the printer by selling two prints

Quote:
Hey Dave, reckon your printer could print replacement side-art for my pinball machine
Sure, send me the photos and a roll of appropriate material and I'll send you the prints and a bill for ink
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 09:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement