| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 107874 | 2010-03-04 21:57:00 | Photo Printer recommendation | cleanlines (15660) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 864116 | 2010-03-04 21:57:00 | Hi There, I'm looking for a good quality photo printer in the sub $500 category. Anyone have a good current knowledge of what's out there and what prints great photos? Thanks, Fraser |
cleanlines (15660) | ||
| 864117 | 2010-03-04 22:22:00 | Cheaper to get photos printed at the Warehouse etc. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 864118 | 2010-03-04 22:51:00 | More reliable too, cheap printed ones off a printer don't last. | pctek (84) | ||
| 864119 | 2010-03-05 03:30:00 | Some say that witha certification, inkjet "premium" photo papers have a longer life than the lab papers. Re: cost. It is cheaper to get 6x4 at the labs, that's what I do. For A4 or larger it is cheaper to print at home. With home printing you have more control, one can calibrate a monitor with a hardware device and use the manufacture's ICC files for color management. You can also get the printer per the paper custom calibrated too - print some test charts and pay $100 to someone in NZ or $40US and send overseas. They email you a ICC file. You can access more paper selection. You may be able to access more papers at a pro lab but they can be expensive, there is one lab that I have used in the past, they charge $44 for one A3 print. Personally I use Epson and I have printed photographs for competitions and exhibitions. If I put my nose one inch away I cannot tell which one is better the pro lab or me. They are quite similar though. Friends have also used Canon with equal success. Some pro labs would use a Epson but a 44 inch wide format one for huge photographs esp if you want cloth papers and canvas etc. Harvey Norman uses that too I think, as well as Noel Leeming but they probably don't adjust your colors as nice as the pro labs. I bought my printer on Trademe with so much ink it was practically free. The cheaper printers tend to be better in standard glossy than fine art papers. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 864120 | 2010-03-05 05:28:00 | With home printing you have more control, one can calibrate a monitor with a hardware device Expensive to do unless you are very keen and ready to pay quite a bit. Misty :2cents: |
Misty (368) | ||
| 864121 | 2010-03-05 05:40:00 | Some say that witha certification, inkjet "premium" photo papers have a longer life than the lab papers. I have some pics taken around 1900 or so. Lets check back in another say 70 years and see which has lasted. Then we'll know for sure. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 864122 | 2010-03-05 08:23:00 | 70 years is not going to worry me. Printing your own is more expensive but the results you can achieve (even if they don't last 70 years) are so far ahead of what's available commercially, excepting top end labs. Epson Photo printers in my opinion consistently give the best results. | Shortstop (632) | ||
| 1 | |||||