[dms]

For me the printing process is (now) the more creative part of my photography. The choices for a print are not the same as looking at the image on the screen, and there is the question what kind of paper is best. I also have the option to print an image and hang it up so I see it all the time, and thus decide if it has staying power.

For about 10 years I used a small inexpensive (dye) ink jet printer typically printing 8”x whatever” and now I have a larger 13”x whatever (pigment) ink jet printer. Either way the results are the same—as regards the process and the results—except of course the print size and whether a paying customer would accept a dye based print.

Actually coming from film, where prints were done by someone else, the biggest change is:
1. I am doing my own printing
2. for theater photography I can take 1000’s images of a play, versus maybe a 100 images with film.

That is about it—otherwise film and digital are about the same for me. So printing is a big deal for me.

Even if you use labs to print, first printing small you can make the artistic choices, and then you have a print to check the lab’s result. In my case the lab. was my university print shop and I could compare test prints, before having them print large—not sure how it works when using a commercial lab.

If you are not sure you can invest in a small dye based printer as I did, and see. I started with a $70. reconditioned Epson Clara ink set printer, and the results were (for me/effectively) indistinguishable from the Epson large professional pigment based printer. I presume the situation is similar w/ Canon printers.

[UncleVanya]

I have the pixima pro 100 Canon. I love it. 13x19 is a nice size.

[dms]

Incidentally, I don't think maintaining the printers is a problem. I do a printer test (or print an image) every month, and did not have a problem in 10 years w/ my dye based printer. Pigments are (I understand) more problematic, but doing the same schedule has worked fine for the last year I have it.

[Alex645]

I want prints on high-quality paper like Hahnemuhle, Ilford, etc.

Obviously buying a printer is more expensive, but I get instant feedback and more control. I already cut my own mats and do my own framing. I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on this topic - do you print your own work or send it off to a lab?

If you're a pro, you generally want to spend more time shooting than printing, and developing a good rapport with a commercial lab is more practical. BUT I enjoy and get satisfaction of having control over the entire process including printing, mount and matting, and framing.

So if it's a commercial assignment (photos and prints for a client), I'll typically send it to a lab, but if it's for me that I may exhibit, keep, or sell, I will print it myself. I prefer using Epson printers and testing many different papers.

[Serkevan]

I don't own a printer, at least yet... Local lab has large format prints (at least up to A0) and they also do canvas and metal, so I'd rather pay the 30€ I paid for a 50x70 cm (20x28 in) print in baryta paper and not worry about buying the machine, supplies and all that jazz .

For some smaller/test prints the supermarket stuff works well enough in b/w. Colour is a toss up but the lines tend to be very visible which is eugh

[hjoseph7]

I own a Sinfonia CS2 Dye Sublimation amazon.com : Sinfonia Color Stream CS2 Photo Printer - with 3 Year Warranty Included! : Camera & Photo?tag=pentaxforums-20& . After juggling with an Epson 2800 ink-jet that lasted only 8 months because the ink-head kept getting clogged, I chose Peace of Mind with a dye sub. This printer can only put out a 6X9" max print, but it also does 5X7 and 4X6, The prints are not exactly Fine Art Studio quality, but good enough for prints on the run. So far I have had no problems with it. If I need a print for commercial purposes, I send it out to Adorama in NYC, or the folks at Overnight Prints that do a decent enough job.

[cmohr]

I use this.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[BarryE]

A pro lab allows you to send White Label direct to customers. I shifted my business selling prints from having them in stock to letting the printer ship direct to customers. Provided the color management is 100% them this was the most profitable route for me by a large margin. It also meant that I held far fewer frames and spent less time framing and handling materials, instead I took samples to shows and sold a new print directly. Worked well, for me. Home printing for Fine Art prints was never going to be profitable for me as the overheads, handling & postage (the printer took the risk), storage etc etc. Just my pennies/cents worth ...

Edit, I missed the gist of this thread, I'd jumped to the conclusion it was Fine Art for sale. However, I do think a lab is better and now I don't drag myself around art fairs, I still use the pro printer shop I'd been using. I know they will return a print as I see on my screen, so I can can select from a vast selection of papers and sizes that I don't have to keep at home. Plus I can go weeks without printing without having to worry about inks drying up. Plus there's the size issue of a large (ish) printer at home. It seems clear to me that when printers are sold so (relatively) cheaply the manufacturers know they will make much, much more from future ink and head sales. I see parallels with cameras and lenses. Lenses seem expensive compared to camera bodies, but lenses are kept for years, bodies for less time. Prices reflect this.

[Mooncatt]

I don't print much, but considering doing more of it. So far I've only ordered one print and one canvas from Wal-Mart. While the prints themselves are ok, I've noticed that are darker than expected, and I think it's actually more to do with my monitor/editing than the prints themselves. My next goal is to get a good monitor and calibrate it, then see if Wal-Mart type prints are ok or if I'll want to use a dedicated lab. I don't want to spend the extra on a lab, only to find out I'm sending poor quality images in the first place.

[Viking42]

I am trying to decide if I should spend the money and buy a 13x19 (Canon Pro-100 or similar) or larger printer for my fine art photographs or create an account with a lab like WHCC. I am looking for prints other than resin-coated Fuji Crystal Archive color paper and Epson poster printer type prints you can get at Costco. I want prints on high-quality paper like Hahnemuhle, Ilford, etc.

Obviously buying a printer is more expensive, but I get instant feedback and more control. I already cut my own mats and do my own framing. I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on this topic - do you print your own work or send it off to a lab?

A few years ago I was pretty much set on buying a printer (Epson), and was about to reach for my wallet when I happened to ask the sales person "How long does the ink last if you don't use it regularly?". His answer stopped me dead, and after a quick bit of mental math decided this was a no-go. When factored over a year or more, the cost per print from all the wasted ink was just far too high. So now I walk down to my local art framing shop, who have a huge pro Epson model and a wide choice of fine art papers. The owner is happy to work with me to do small test strips (just like I used to do in the darkroom ) so I can proof tone and brightness. The latter is actually critical, as my monitors are not calibrated to her printer. Wonderful service, great results, fair prices, and I support a small local family business.

For a time I did use a larger commercial printing house that did excellent work, but I basically had little control over proofing and final output. They would do test strips, but charged a lot for them and the turnaround was days, not minutes like my local shop.

So that's something for you to consider, is finding a small local shop that will spend the time and work with you as a partner to get you the results you want. Worth every penny as far as I'm concerned. For me, it's better than having my own printer as they know way more than I do how to get the best from a printer, I don't have to fuss around with any hardware, software and consumables. And it's far less costly.

[rogerstg]

I use my office HP Color LaserJet for convenience prints up to 5x7. It works OK, but it's not for larger prints to be framed. I use Nations Photo Labs for bigger, better stuff.

[Mooncatt]

So that's something for you to consider, is finding a small local shop that will spend the time and work with you as a partner to get you the results you want. Worth every penny as far as I'm concerned. For me, it's better than having my own printer as they know way more than I do how to get the best from a printer, I don't have to fuss around with any hardware, software and consumables. And it's far less costly.

Thanks for that suggestion. I know there are print shops around here, but had always seen them advertised for commercial printing (large signs, vehicle wraps, brochures, etc). I'm going to ask around to see if there's any that do good photo printing work.

[Viking42]

Thanks for that suggestion. I know there are print shops around here, but had always seen them advertised for commercial printing (large signs, vehicle wraps, brochures, etc). I'm going to ask around to see if there's any that do good photo printing work.

The place I work with is actually an art framing shop. While that is their main business, they also offer printing services. If you can find someone like that in your area, who already works with art pieces rather than vehicle wraps (if you see what I mean), you might have a better fit there. Best of luck!

[Mooncatt]

The place I work with is actually an art framing shop. While that is their main business, they also offer printing services. If you can find someone like that in your area, who already works with art pieces rather than vehicle wraps (if you see what I mean), you might have a better fit there. Best of luck!

I do have a couple of pieces of art I'm wanting framed, so I do plan to ask about printing services when I get around to that as well.

[ChristianRock]

I had a $100 gift card a couple years ago from work, so I bought an Epson XP-640 and the early prints came out pretty good, slightly better than Walgreen's. 11x14 is the largest size but that is god for family pictures, and easy to find frames for the size.

Then it went downhill as the printer heads clogged up constantly, and I had to run the head cleaning cycle a lot. So much so that the waste tank filled up this year... and I hadn't even printed much since the first couple months that I got it. And it's a non-user serviceable part - you have to send the printer to do that. And it costs more than buying a new one.

Never buying Epson again. For $100 (plus the cost of replacement ink which is not cheap) I could have had a lot more beautiful prints from a good dedicated print shop, than I ended up with. That's what I'm doing from now on.