To buy a printer or use online printers?

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Oh boy, what a rabbit hole!  Just googling paper types is overwhelming ...

 

[Advertisement]

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

[hansvons]

On 10/9/2024 at 9:55 AM, LocalHero1953 said:

Paper is a whole new can of worms. Most of the major brands produce a sample pack; I got packs from Canson and Hahnemühle, and most of my papers are now Canson. I aim to have stocks of textured matt, plain matt, semi-gloss and gloss, all in fibre-based archive quality, though I use semi-gloss and plain matt most of the time.

When I started printing (so glad I did!), I asked myself what paper the big names in photography-based fine art use for most of their printing. It's Hahnemühle Photo Rag, THE classic fine art inkjet paper. I defaulted to that for my large prints (60 x 80 cm) and can't be happier. I also have a roll of Hahnemühle Photo Rag Baryta. I'm not convinced this is my go-to B&W paper for the foreseeable future. I feel that there could be a better or more fitting Baryta paper that follows the classic darkroom Baryta prints story less elaborately–if that makes sense. I also have a roll of 17-inch, relatively cheap Media Jet Litho Archive Matt, which comes close to Photo Rag in terms of colour, contrast, and white point but doesn't have the haptics and punch. It's brilliant for test printing and picture selection, as I have all the images I deem good enough printed for further investigation.

 

14 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Simple, if you’re worried, run a test print or a nozzle check every few weeks if your Epson is idle.  As noted, I haven’t had a serious clog in 15 years, with two machines. The Epson 4900 was a dud as far as clogs, but well known and now replaced with newer model. Canon will run cleanings whether you want or not, if you’ve been following.

I have the Canon Pro 4600, and it's a fantastic piano of a printer with more than 3 litres of ink. Thus, when the printer is not used for ten days or more, the cleaning process that costs the ink of roughly an A3 print is neglectable. But if I were in the market for a 17-inch desktop printer that comes naturally with much smaller cartridges, Epson printers would have an edge regarding wasted ink for head cleaning. However, I briefly owned an Epson 4900; this machine was the worst clogger ever. I can't agree more here. 

 

15 hours ago, ALScott said:

This is one of this issues mentioned that worries the most, not printing enough and causing clogs, wasting ink, etc.  So, how often do you print and how do you avoid issued if it isn't much?

Printing isn't cheap. However, if you fear the costs of wasting ink, paper, etc., maybe you shouldn't do it. It's a rabbit hole that will swallow you entirely. You should be prepared to spend considerable money and time on it. But when you get the hang of it, it's more rewarding than anything else the world of photography can provide.

 

On 10/9/2024 at 9:55 AM, LocalHero1953 said:

You will need to calibrate your monitor yourself, and you will need paper profiles. (You might find your next expense is a better monitor.) You may trust third party paper profiles (from the paper maker or from the software provider like Imageprint) or make your own - I have a Calibrite device that calibrates both monitor and paper, but I also use the paper manufacturers' own profiles. The paper profiles are used by whatever printing software you use; I print from Lightroom, but there's Imageprint and other dedicated printing apps.

My approach is a tad less techy. I have a proper self-calibrating Eizo set to 5000k; my atelier is lit with calibrated 5000k tubes, and I use Mirage Print and HM Photo Rag for printing. The latter two work brilliantly in tandem, with highly predictable results when comparing the screen and the final print from my Pro 4600. One of Photo Rag's greatest virtues is its white point, which matches the white of a calibrated monitor as closely as possible at 5000k.

Edited October 10, 2024 by hansvons

[hansvons]

8 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Oh boy, what a rabbit hole!  Just googling paper types is overwhelming ...

Don't do it. It makes you mad. Instead, follow the lead of experienced fine art printers with demanding clients (unlike Whitewall), famous artists, and your taste.

If you prefer matte, start with Hahnemühle Photo Rag, arguably the king of fine art inkjet printing. You can test all of Photo Rag's contenders and Hahnemühle's derivates or stay with the original.

If you like gloss prints for classic B&W or punchy colour photos that are supposed to look like darkroom prints, go the Baryta route. This is a bit more complex, as many contenders have good reputations and no classic kingpin. Canson makes a very good Baryta paper, and Hahnemühle has four different Baryta offerings in its portfolio. I find cotton unnecessary for these prints, but I prefer natural white without artificial whiteners (sans OBAs). Others want cold whites behind a warm-toned matte. 

In my case, I only need two papers: matte and Baryta. That's it. Rabbit hole closed. The rest is creating great printing files from great photos. The last is the most difficult one.

 

[hansvons]

No print thread without prints. 60x80cm, Photo Rag, no glass, 35mm Summicron ASPH, Kodak 5213. Click to enlarge.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

[LocalHero1953]

Just checked my paper stock:

Canson Platine Fibre Rag (semi gloss), Rag Photographique (flat matt), BFK Rives (textured matte), Baryta Photographique II (gloss but not high gloss)

Hahnemühle Photo Rag Books & Albums 220gsm (double sided matt, for books)

Permajet Oyster: cheap semi gloss.

And then there're the washi papers.............

[Paul K]

A few months ago, I added the ProGraf-300 to my workspace. It has a smaller footprint than the 1000, and I don't find that I go through the inks (aside from the Photo Black) as quickly as expected. The quality is about 90% of the 1000 on B&W and directly comparable in color, and I haven't had any issues with calibration. I split between Canon Pro papers for proof prints and Canson Baryta for finals, and the ability to control the quality in studio rather than through a service bureau is worth every penny.

[Doug A]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, ALScott said:

This is one of this issues mentioned that worries the most, not printing enough and causing clogs, wasting ink, etc.  So, how often do you print and how do you avoid issued if it isn't much?

The P700 is my only printer so I use it for office kinds of things as well as photo work. The last job was a schedule (one page on office copy paper) I printed for my wife about a week ago. And about two weeks ago I printed one contact page on 8.5x11 Ultra Pro Satin and two 12x12 prints on the Aurora Art Natural fine art paper. And that's pretty typical of the use I make of the printer. (All the photo prints are B&W using Epson ABW. The schedule was in several colors.)

I do nothing specific to avoid issues and I have had no issues with the printer in the almost four years I have been using it. 

[ALScott]

2 hours ago, Paul K said:

A few months ago, I added the ProGraf-300 to my workspace. It has a smaller footprint than the 1000, and I don't find that I go through the inks (aside from the Photo Black) as quickly as expected. The quality is about 90% of the 1000 on B&W and directly comparable in color, and I haven't had any issues with calibration. I split between Canon Pro papers for proof prints and Canson Baryta for finals, and the ability to control the quality in studio rather than through a service bureau is worth every penny.

2 hours ago, Doug A said:

The P700 is my only printer so I use it for office kinds of things as well as photo work. The last job was a schedule (one page on office copy paper) I printed for my wife about a week ago. And about two weeks ago I printed one contact page on 8.5x11 Ultra Pro Satin and two 12x12 prints on the Aurora Art Natural fine art paper. And that's pretty typical of the use I make of the printer. (All the photo prints are B&W using Epson ABW. The schedule was in several colors.)

I do nothing specific to avoid issues and I have had no issues with the printer in the almost four years I have been using it. 

I have room for the 1100 so I have ordered it.  I looked hard at the 300 but know that I will want to make larger prints.  I was looking at the P900 but found way more complaints about slow printing, overall build quality and customer service complaints.  I take all of those reviews with a grain of salt and mostly look at mid range reviews, not 1 or 5 stars.  I wish I could find a P800 that everyone raves about. I had Canon scanners and printers of all sorts over the years, not to mention my old gear, and never had an issue with any of it.  I will buy the Canon 4 year plan also for peace of mind.  I finally started looking at other video reviews from other than "printer reviewers" and that was helpful as they were more aligned with my views/desire for getting a printer, much like the comments everyone here has been providing.  

Edited October 10, 2024 by ALScott

[IkarusJohn]

4 hours ago, hansvons said:

Don't do it. It makes you mad. Instead, follow the lead of experienced fine art printers with demanding clients (unlike Whitewall), famous artists, and your taste.

If you prefer matte, start with Hahnemühle Photo Rag, arguably the king of fine art inkjet printing. You can test all of Photo Rag's contenders and Hahnemühle's derivates or stay with the original.

If you like gloss prints for classic B&W or punchy colour photos that are supposed to look like darkroom prints, go the Baryta route. This is a bit more complex, as many contenders have good reputations and no classic kingpin. Canson makes a very good Baryta paper, and Hahnemühle has four different Baryta offerings in its portfolio. I find cotton unnecessary for these prints, but I prefer natural white without artificial whiteners (sans OBAs). Others want cold whites behind a warm-toned matte. 

In my case, I only need two papers: matte and Baryta. That's it. Rabbit hole closed. The rest is creating great printing files from great photos. The last is the most difficult one.

 

Thank you, Hans. I have ordered a box each of A4 and A3+ Hanhemühle Photo Rag matte to get started, and will get some Baryta for the B&W, and will stick with these for the moment. I have an Eizo monitor, and will need to do battle with my scanners and years of slides … might be some time before I come up for air.

What has held me back for some time has been the variables - VueScan settings, processing, monitor calibration, printer settings.  I’m hoping to start with as few variables as I can.  Daunting.

[Jeff S]

ImagePrint (Black) eliminates all the printer setting issues, and provides excellent profiles for any papers (and lighting conditions). Settings are automatically optimized after picking paper and profile choice. Plus avoids potential Adobe/Epson/Apple software compatibility issues. And has many control features for fine tuning.  Operates full time in soft proof mode, potentially avoiding wasted paper. Pricey, but great value; I wouldn’t be without it. Customer service is also exceptional.

Jeff

Edited October 10, 2024 by Jeff S

[hansvons]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Daunting.

Absolutely 😉.

[Stuart Richardson]

As someone who does this for a living, I would not wish it on my worst enemy. I guess doing it for a job ruins a lot of the joy of getting your print on paper yourself, but I can say that inkjet printing is a series of endless hassles: clogs, driver malfunctions, ink scams (meaning the printer uses too much, clogs, forces cleaning and then charges you insane amounts, region locks them etc). I will be contrarian and say that if I did not print as many exhibitions as I do, and have everything myself, I would try to find a local fine art printer. I would not recommend sending it out, necessarily. You might get good prints, but being able to build a relationship with someone and be there for adjustments and test prints etc...that really is what makes a difference. The best printer in the world is not going to do very well if you give them a poorly set up file and you ask them to print it without adjustment (which will be the default assumption). If you want to do it yourself from scratch, go for it, but I would suggest a desktop printer before getting a huge floorstanding model. A RIP is probably nice if you can get it for a reasonable price. That said, I tried Mirage but I found it worse than the Adobe/Epson pipeline. It would not allow for tone adjustment in black and white mode and did not have the settings I needed to control paper/ink handling. Hopefully image print is better.

I use Photo Rag Baryta as my main paper...not really a huge matte fan, but I do use Photo Rag 308 as the main matte paper for the studio. I do think the lack of OBA in Photo Rag Baryta makes it a better, more archival paper, no matter what Hahnemühle says about their OBA added papers (like 308, unfortunately). The rag papers are nice because they tend not to keep their curl as much as the denser alpha cellulose papers. In general, if you are looking to avoid fading and have the nicest prints, I would stick to rag or washi papers and use OBA free papers. If I were just starting out with printing at home, I would probably get the Epson P900. 17" wide is the minimum I would consider, but any bigger and the machines start getting huge. The ink tanks are also more economical at that size. The small ones are truly highway robbery.

[IkarusJohn]

6 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

As someone who does this for a living, I would not wish it on my worst enemy. I guess doing it for a job ruins a lot of the joy of getting your print on paper yourself, but I can say that inkjet printing is a series of endless hassles: clogs, driver malfunctions, ink scams (meaning the printer uses too much, clogs, forces cleaning and then charges you insane amounts, region locks them etc). I will be contrarian and say that if I did not print as many exhibitions as I do, and have everything myself, I would try to find a local fine art printer. I would not recommend sending it out, necessarily. You might get good prints, but being able to build a relationship with someone and be there for adjustments and test prints etc...that really is what makes a difference. The best printer in the world is not going to do very well if you give them a poorly set up file and you ask them to print it without adjustment (which will be the default assumption). If you want to do it yourself from scratch, go for it, but I would suggest a desktop printer before getting a huge floorstanding model. A RIP is probably nice if you can get it for a reasonable price. That said, I tried Mirage but I found it worse than the Adobe/Epson pipeline. It would not allow for tone adjustment in black and white mode and did not have the settings I needed to control paper/ink handling. Hopefully image print is better.

I use Photo Rag Baryta as my main paper...not really a huge matte fan, but I do use Photo Rag 308 as the main matte paper for the studio. I do think the lack of OBA in Photo Rag Baryta makes it a better, more archival paper, no matter what Hahnemühle says about their OBA added papers (like 308, unfortunately). The rag papers are nice because they tend not to keep their curl as much as the denser alpha cellulose papers. In general, if you are looking to avoid fading and have the nicest prints, I would stick to rag or washi papers and use OBA free papers. If I were just starting out with printing at home, I would probably get the Epson P900. 17" wide is the minimum I would consider, but any bigger and the machines start getting huge. The ink tanks are also more economical at that size. The small ones are truly highway robbery.

I got there, Stuart.  Thanks for the advice!

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

….but I can say that inkjet printing is a series of endless hassles: clogs, driver malfunctions, ink scams (meaning the printer uses too much, clogs, forces cleaning and then charges you insane amounts, region locks them etc). 

Yikes,  fortunately not my experience at all.  Minimal hassles over 15 years, but I’ve stuck with 17” machines, using single paper feed, and do it for my own pleasure and rewards (with some exhibitions and sales).  Far less time and hassle than darkroom days, for sure.  And yes, ImagePrint is fantastic… as a RIP and far more.

Jeff

Edited October 10, 2024 by Jeff S

[IkarusJohn]

I had a look for ImagePrint Black, but unfortunately the ColourByte website isn't responding.

[Jeff S]

Site seems temporarily down.  Meanwhile, there are some videos you could watch, for instance, Kevin Raber has interviewed John Pannozzo (CEO and brilliant creator) a number of times over the years as IP continues to evolve and add features.  (I use a fraction of the features as a non-commercial printer).  Here’s one from a couple of years ago, which covers the basic interface, layout flexibility, profiling methods and benefits, editing controls (nearer the end), etc.  There are various other interviews and tutorials available.

Jeff

[Barrie Lynn Bryant]

Hi, everyone. This is my first post. I look forward to posting every now and then.

Glad to hear you want to print your own work, ALScott! Lots of my friends like the Canon 1000. The 1100 might be better. Canon did make one change to it that I just learned about earlier tonight. I mention that detail below.

I am a big proponent of printing one's work instead of letting someone else do it. It's a collaboration the latter way, and that's ok if that's what you want to do. I like doing it myself.

I started in the darkroom in 1989. I still have my Omega D2 Prolab, but I made the digital printing transition in 2002 with an Epson 2200. That was a 13-inch printer. I moved up to 17-inch printers after that printer died. I thoroughly loved the P800 and it lasted me 6 years. The P900 pales in comparison, and Epson's customer service was poor then. When I first purchased it, they sent me three bad printers in a row while I was teaching four documentary courses. I carried my printer to the classes and taught everyone how to print. Everyone will tell you that printers don't like to be moved. The P800 was fine and more durable for that. The P900 is not. It has more sensors throughout that get tripped or whatever and cause malfunction. I am scared to move the darned thing, but it makes fabulous prints most of the time. It's slow to load and that can get fussy with the 300 gsm papers. I cannot see how Epson improved when it made this thing. But I use it. And I like it better than the Canon Prograf Pro-1000. I have one of them, also. The Canon weighs 75 lbs, so, it's heavy. But it's the printer I take to classes when I teach. Ahem, but not when I teach panorama.

The Epson P900 will print long panoramas. The Canon 1000 will not. It'll only print 46" long. Really a sad thing. I just read about the Canon 1100, and I downloaded and looked in the manual. It will print up to 129 inches long. So, they are doing better for my needs with that.

I use Hahnemühle paper, and mostly the choices in their Natural Line of Bamboo, Hemp, Agave, and Sugar Cane. The Sugar Cane is the newest in this line.  I've mostly used the Bamboo. It does not have optical brighteners. I like the Hemp, too. It is brighter. I chose Bamboo because it was not as bright and because it is 90 percent Bamboo fiber. It's part of the sustainability mindset, if that can be a thing with printing paper. The surface of these papers is soft and printed images that are stacked can cause surface blemish. Be careful how you handle your prints. These papers are single-sided and matte finish. I usually frame my work quickly to avoid problems.

Since I used to print on Ilford Multigrade Fiberbase Glossy in the darkroom, I don't know why I have resisted using Fine Art Baryta Glossy. I think it has optical brighteners. It gets touted as the paper the traditional black-and-white photographer would want to use just because it is most similar to the Fiberbase. I get excellent results with the Natural Line, though.

I do not have calibration equipment and I edit my photos on a 17-inch laptop that is not calibrated. Every exhibition space and house and office has different lighting. Sure, I want my prints to look the best I can make them look, and I think I can do that without calibration gear. One of the things that can get in the way of doing things is whether something is accessible or not. Calibration and better monitors cost more money. I am usually presenting to people who will not spend the money like that. Heck, I haven't, either. I use PhotoShop, and I judge my digital files on how they look when printed. This is my workflow. Happy printing to you! I look forward to seeing some prints.

[david strachan]

Great answer Barrie.

And  a very warm welcome to the forum.  I look forward to more of your contributions.

All best...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ALScott]

9 hours ago, Barrie Lynn Bryant said:w.

I am a big proponent of printing one's work instead of letting someone else do it. It's a collaboration the latter way, and that's ok if that's what you want to do. I like doing it myself.

I started in the darkroom in 1989. I still have my Omega D2 Prolab,

I started in the darkroom in 1989 also. I always used Beseler enlargers as that was what the university provided.  I did love printing.  I even built an awesome darkroom in the basement of one of our homes.  For whatever reason, the closest I ever got to glossy for my own stuff was Ilford Pearl.  I printed glossy some but for stuff I planned to frame, pearl was as "glossy" as I would go.  I used a lot of fiber papers too but they were a lot of extra work.  For now I have ordered only Canon's Luster to get started as recommended by Keith Coopers videos.  Thanks for your reply, very helpful.

[Barrie Lynn Bryant]

Thank you for the kind words and warm welcome, Dave (David Strachan).

You are welcome, ALScott. I also had a Beseler 23C with a dichroic head, but left it behind. I taught an Ilfochrome Classic course at the Arkansas Arts Center in spring 1994 just before moving to Wyoming. Ilford provided me with a P30 processor for that one. It's fun to print color, especially transparency film, but more fun to print B&W because we can watch it develop in the safelight. Much more gratifying. I never did dye transfer, or I might have changed my mind about color printing. The Ilford glossy FB paper was (maybe still is?) awesome. The gloss is somewhere between the RC pearl and RC glossy surfaces. But it has more depth. Beautiful depth!

Way to go ordering a printer and paper. Here's to your printing enjoyment and success!