Favorite Lab for Large B&W Prints

[BWColor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve always printed at home using Canon ProGraf printers.  The new 2600 is out and looks to be a killer printer for B&W.  Unfortunately, printing at home for personal use is quite expensive due to maintenance ink loss .  Any experience out there with B&W Fine Arts print labs for 16x24” and larger prints?  How about monochrome photo albums, or a combination albums of B&W/color?  

 

Perhaps this post is misplaced, but given the sub-forums available, this forum seems most relevant.

Edited May 21, 2024 by BWColor

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jeff S]

You’ll get better response in the Digital Post Processing section of the forum; tons of related posts for search. You can ask the mods to move post… just hit report button, top right.
 

I don’t print large, but I could print 16x24 even on my 17 inch Epson P800, which suits my needs and has efficient 80ml cartridges. The Canon Pro 1000 is equivalent. B&W prints are superb (based on user judgment, of course), especially using ImagePrint software.

Jeff

[hansvons]

15 hours ago, BWColor said:

The new 2600 is out and looks to be a killer printer for B&W.

I have the 4600. They are "killers" for colour as well. 

However, all professional fine art printers from the last 15 years or so have delivered stunning results depending much on the paper. 

Why I started printing myself are three reasons. First, I just print and don't think twice. Secondly, I get better results by editing the picture tailored to the paper and test print. Thirdly, even a brand new 44” printer is cheaper than a used Noctilux but indefinitely more useful. 

That said, Whitewall offers high-quality prints reliably. For B&W I’d go for a baryta coated paper. 

[Jeff S]

20 hours ago, BWColor said:

  Unfortunately, printing at home for personal use is quite expensive due to maintenance ink loss .  

This is a “feature” of Canon printers, since they have hot firing heads that build residue and therefore run mandatory cleaning cycles that cannot be disabled (and have user replaceable heads for when they wear out). Best for those who print regularly, since ink will be used anyway, and wasted if not printing. Epson uses cold firing heads, and cleaning cycles are primarily user controlled. Modern Epsons don’t clog for most users, the 4900 (no longer produced) a notable exception.  My 3800 and P800 haven’t clogged and don’t waste ink. I simply run a test print now and then if the machine is idle for an extended time.

Jeff

[BWColor]

5 hours ago, hansvons said:

I have the 4600. They are "killers" for colour as well. 

Thirdly, even a brand new 44” printer is cheaper than a used Noctilux but indefinitely more useful. 

That said, Whitewall offers high-quality prints reliably. For B&W I’d go for a baryta coated paper. 

I don’t think that the cost of the printer is an issue, but maintenance and the need for regular (daily?) printing with these printers is a perceived issue.  As mentioned, Epson printers have different trade-offs.

Whitewalls looks to be a great option for those that reside on a certain large island.

[Jeff S]

Trade offs?

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 5/22/2024 at 8:35 AM, BWColor said:

 As mentioned, Epson printers have different trade-offs.

What trade offs?  I haven’t experienced any problems in 15 years, with two models.  The first one I donated to a local school in good working order after 8 years.

Jeff

[BWColor]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

What trade offs?  I haven’t experienced any problems in 15 years, with two models.  The first one I donated to a local school in good working order after 8 years.

Jeff

Hi Jeff:

As far as I know Epson makes great printers.  When I purchased two Canon Pro 1000, I cross shopped with the Epson P900.  There were two reasons I went with the Canon.  One, were the insane rebates where each printer ended up costing around $50.  Secondly, was the ability to use aftermarket inks and reload the cartridges on the Canon.  I ran one printer with OEM and the other with Precision Colors aftermarket  inks, which were 25% of OEM inks.  I couldn’t tell the difference and neither has faded.  Epson doesn’t demand  daily printing like the Canon, so buying  OEM ink is likely more friendly than buying Canon OEM.  I don’t believe that Epson ink cartridges can be reloaded with aftermarket inks.  BTW.. if I sold what I printed, I would only use OEM ink.

The new Canon 2600, 4600 and 6600  printers claims that their new inks have an expanded color gamut and exhibit more resistant to fading.  Also, ergonomic improvements compared to the previous Canons.  I don’t know how they compare to the competing Epsons.

[Jeff S]

No wonder you expressed concerns with ink costs, working with two Pro 1000 printers!  I print a fair amount, but not nearly enough to keep even one of those active enough to avoid wasted inks from mandated clean cycles.  I stick with OEM inks, considering prints a critical part of my hobby, not profession, where I’ve already spent a ton on expensive camera gear, computer gear, software, mat and framing tools and supplies, papers, etc, etc. Cost of participation for me. 
 

And, yes, always important to check for manufacturer and dealer rebates.  Both of my Epsons were purchased with significant discounts. As with razor and blade marketing, the profits for the printer companies are in the inks.  The Epson philosophy regarding print head design and user directed cleanings works best for me as I oblige their quest for ink purchases. But at least that cost correlates with my print frequency, not dictated by the machine.
 

Jeff

[BWColor]

My printers cost less than replacing a couple of ink cartridges, so I wanted to directly compare prints from OEM and Precision Color inks.  Beyond that, don’t need two printers.  I packed my printers to move three years ago, so I doubt that they will function at this point.  Due to the impossibility of printing daily, I think that the Epson makes sense.   My kids go off to college in August and I get the office back and will setup a printer.  I’m tempted with going larger, but the larger Epsons get mixed reviews.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, BWColor said:

 My kids go off to college in August and I get the office back and will setup a printer.  I’m tempted with going larger, but the larger Epsons get mixed reviews.

Whole different beast.  This old article raises still relevant questions.

https://www.northlight-images.co.uk/so-you-want-a-large-format-printer/

Not for me, especially as I prefer smaller prints, regardless of the other issues.

Jeff

[hansvons]

My Canon 4600 runs with 4.2 litres of original Canon ink of the newest flavour, which costs about 2.000 Euros, including VAT. That is roughly 40% cheaper than what the inks cost in a 1000 Pro. And these are the legacy type (still amazingly good). 

The running costs of a large printer can be considerably lower if you print regularly. Add to that paper rolls instead of sheets and you’ll cut down cost roughly by 50% and more compared to the usual 17” sheet printers.