price/quality online prints Vs printing at home

Asgaroth · 05-25-2009, 11:13 AM

Hi Guys/Gals

I'm just curious about price and quality using home JetPrinter Something like Epson 1400 Vs online printing or costco / wallmart printing.

any idea what is cheaper or better quality.

Thanks

*Wheatfield* · 05-25-2009, 11:26 AM

Depends on where you live and how good a photofinisher you are.
Digital puts almost all of the quality control onto the photographer. As long as the lab is maintaining their equipment, running chemistry controls and paper profiles on a daily basis, they've done their end of the job.
After that, it's up to you to have a calibrated system and an idea of what you are doing.

Since labs are very variable, you need to send files to the labs you are interested in dealing with to see what they do.

It will always be cheaper to print at a photo lab, as the material cost of running consumer inkjet printers is absurdly expensive, especialy for smaller prints, and if you don't have a handle on colourspaces, paper profiles,etc, it can get very expensive.

*tybeck* · 05-25-2009, 12:53 PM

For myself most of my photo display is online and thus my printing needs are minimal. I ran the numbers for my needs and decided that even with a cheap inkjet printer sending my photos out of house would be cheaper and the product would be better. From the reviews I read the output from those cheap printers would be substandard to any decent photo development shop. So I'd say unless you need a large amount of control over your output or can't wait a few days (or hours in some cases) to get your prints, farming the job out makes more economic sense and you will likely get a better result.

I tried a few online services and found Adorama to be quite good. You can download their calibration files for their different papers so you can have a large amount of control over your output and they will run them as is with no adjustment.

kenyee · 05-25-2009, 02:56 PM

ditto online...the other issue is w/ inkjets, the heads need cleaning or clog. Run a few cleaning cycles at a store to see what I mean.
If you had to get a printer for home use, I'd get an Epson R2880 or R3800...cartridges are bigger so print cost is cheaper, but they're massive...

Asgaroth · 05-25-2009, 02:59 PM

thank you guysfor your answers. That's what I though. I was just a bit impressed with HP 4480 very cheap photoprinter (though it was a little bit red"ish") I will use it untill the ink lasts and will switch to adorama or something simmilar.

tlwyse · 05-25-2009, 08:07 PM

It is generally going to be more expensive to do your own photo printing but I would say the quality could be potentially much higher than commercial print services, especially if you have custom profiles made or you purchase the profiling gear and do it yourself.

For an Epson printer (I've checked this on Epson 3800, 4000, 4800 and 7800 printers and it's remarkably consistent), the ink usage is going to run you between 1.80 and 2.40 ml/sq.ft. (figure between $1.10-$1.40 per sq.ft.) plus the cost of the media ($.75-$1.50 per sq.ft.).

Purchasing your own profiling gear will run you minimum $1,200 (EyeOne Pro + Match) up to about $4,000 for the good stuff (XRite PROFILER or ProfileMaker + automated spectro).

For some like myself, handing off the printing of my digital photos to some unknown person would be like handing off my B&W film for processing and printing years ago...inconceivable.

Regards,
Terry Wyse
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting

*er1kksen* · 05-25-2009, 08:40 PM

I just ordered a couple 12x18's from Adorama for $3 each; if you keep an eye on their pricing page some really great deals pop up from time to time.

I should recieve them within the week, so I'll let you know how they turn out. Next time I print I'll probably try out those profiles, for this order I just figured I'd see how good their lab-correcters are...

*Wheatfield* · 05-25-2009, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by tlwyse

For some like myself, handing off the printing of my digital photos to some unknown person would be like handing off my B&W film for processing and printing years ago...inconceivable.

While I appreciate the thought, you are comparing fish to bicycles.
If your system is calibrated, and the lab doing the printing is calibrated, and you are sending them files that have compatable profiles (sRGB is a safe bet) you should be in a wysiwyg situation.

*er1kksen* · 05-30-2009, 05:49 AM

btw, the prints I ordered came in from adorama a couple days ago and they look FANTASTIC.

Frogroast · 05-31-2009, 06:51 AM

Considering Mr Wyse is in the business of color management, I understand his point and concern about sending off his images to be printed. It would be like me having my personal computers serviced by Best Buy when I manage a 100+ systems network at work. The thought of that sends shivers down my spine, lol.

However, from a practical standpoint, printing images for mission-critical tasks is quite different from printing images for a refrigerator or even a wedding or senior book. As much as I would love to print my own stuff, it's just neither cost effective nor time-effective. Sure I could print photos, but I do books, odd-size prints and other print products as well. Considering the cost of me printing versus sending it out, I just can't justify the TCO and ROI numbers.

So I use WHCC, I have no concerns whatsoever of the quality of their output. Print quality hasn't failed me in the 2 years I've used them.

*Wheatfield* · 05-31-2009, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Frogroast

Considering Mr Wyse is in the business of color management, I understand his point and concern about sending off his images to be printed. It would be like me having my personal computers serviced by Best Buy when I manage a 100+ systems network at work. The thought of that sends shivers down my spine, lol.

However, from a practical standpoint, printing images for mission-critical tasks is quite different from printing images for a refrigerator or even a wedding or senior book. As much as I would love to print my own stuff, it's just neither cost effective nor time-effective. Sure I could print photos, but I do books, odd-size prints and other print products as well. Considering the cost of me printing versus sending it out, I just can't justify the TCO and ROI numbers.

So I use WHCC, I have no concerns whatsoever of the quality of their output. Print quality hasn't failed me in the 2 years I've used them.

Everyone with a digital camera is in the business of colour management. Some people hang out a shingle and make a business out of it.

*MikeW* · 05-31-2009, 04:53 PM

I, too, have been very pleased with Adorama's work. Nonetheless, I recently tried WHCC (WHCC.com) and I was AMAZED. What they sent me was really excellent and perfectly matched my calibrated monitor. I once toyed with the idea of getting a photo printer, but after receiving prints from Adorama and now WHCC I see no point in doing so.

Mountain Vision · 06-01-2009, 11:36 PM

I cost more per page to print at home, but it's not why I print via the lab.

I just prefer Chromira and Frontier prints to inkjets. Others prefer the look of inkjets (this includes Giclee).

I also like the longevity, as well as the ability to print with fewer dpi/ppi.

There are advantages to inkjets, larger color gamut comes to mind.

Costco and Walmart use the Frontier system, which is pretty damn good. The problem of course is the software they use and getting profiles to calibrate. Costco has profiles floating around, Walmart, not as easy to find. Walmart also applies color correction and other corrections in "auto" mode unless you ask the tech to turn it off.

MPIX, myPhotopipe, Adorama, and EZPrints have all given me excellent results from my calibrated system, and the choice of papers is pretty good. I love MPIX for black and white!

Originally Posted by Asgaroth

Hi Guys/Gals

I'm just curious about price and quality using home JetPrinter Something like Epson 1400 Vs online printing or costco / wallmart printing.

any idea what is cheaper or better quality.

Thanks