[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Click for more| Home]

Printing company recommendations

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 14
Thread images: 1

File: tpps-printing.jpg (631KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
tpps-printing.jpg
631KB, 2048x1536px
For those of us who don't have local printers, let's put together a list of printers who do good work.
>>
>>2682004
Typical Canon and Epson printers are all you need if you only have some hundred rather than thousands of photo prints a week.

You still want to consider 3rd party ink or a 3rd party ink supply system.
>>
>>2682009
That gets stupidly expensive if you print larger than 8x10 (even expensive there) and precludes a large number of printing options as well.
>>
>>2682015
No, not with 3rd party inks (that you maybe reset and refill), not if you install a CISS and just feed the ink from tanks.

It's certainly not how Canon / Epson thought they'd make their monies, but it gives you a high quality printer on the cheap.

> and precludes a large number of printing options as well
Like what? They're inkjets, and you can get those Canon / Epson printers up to a pretty decent size.

I guess you won't conveniently print billboard-sized prints, but I see no large issue overall?
>>
I just send my prints to ProDPI.
Colors are accurate and prices are reasonable. Cost less than trying to keep your printer calibrated especially when you're using 3rd party inks which will likely have variations. Driver updates will also throw shit off.
>>
>>2682017
Umm, to print up to 13x19, you've got to drop around $1000 on a printer.

Not everyone prints everything in 4x6. I'm sure a lot of people do have their own printer for smaller print sizes. When you want/need to go larger, it's not worth it.

>like what
Print options, not printer.
Papers, canvases, and the other various materials you can have pictures printed on.

Look, I'm cool with the fact that you like printing your own stuff and whatnot like that, but that's not what this thread is about/for.
>>
>>2682025
> especially when you're using 3rd party inks which will likely have variations
Actually, they likely won't, because they just buy industrially made ink. It's not exactly like that industry is new to quality control.

>>2682028
> Umm, to print up to 13x19, you've got to drop around $1000 on a printer.
Sure? Never said anything else. Are you implying that this is "stupidly expensive", or that Canon / Epson have no such printers?

I mean, what volumes are we even talking about here?

I was assuming that you were considering a printer like in the OP, and was simply cautioning that it's possibly not worth owning one of these for a low hundreds volume of prints a week.

In that situation you really probably should get a Canon / Epson. Doesn't matter if you do a low hundred 13x19 or 10x5 or 4x6 with their respective corresponding machines.

If you print many hundreds of 13x10 or thousands of 10x5 or 4x6, sure, clearly get one of these.
>>
>>2682028
> Papers, canvases, and the other various materials you can have pictures printed on.
Yes, the typical stuff works with such inkjets.

> Look, I'm cool with the fact that you like printing your own stuff and whatnot like that, but that's not what this thread is about/for.
That wasn't evident from the description - to me, printing companies and printers include device manufacturers and devices

Either way, your own device is the obvious go-to if you have medium volumes and no shop in town. One can't really justify repeatedly hiring and driving to a printing expert and all that for some 50-150 - ish count print run, and the online printing services can also get very expensive rapidly in that range.

For really low volumes, just grab a discount printing service like mpix, snapfish and shutterfly. Mpix has the best quality I think, but overall you basically just get what you ordered.

For large volumes, you really want to drive to a print shop and work the details out with them.
>>
>>2682032
>>2682045
>unable to understand difference between the pronouns "who" and "what"
>>
>>2682059
> let's put together a list of printers what do good work.
Like this? Thanks for your English lesson, cousin.

Also, it does not change the response one bit, either way.

Obviously I had to make assertions, but they're listed, and I think I did bother to also address the requirements you added in later posts.
>>
Pretty sure OP isn't asking about home printers that you'd buy at a store.

more like printing services/
>>
Mpix, Adoramapix, Bay photo all do good work. There's a bunch of others but haven't used them. Mpix stands by their products. Had glass in a frame crack during shipping, emailed them a pic of it and they had a new one shipped and here in two days - mind you it was early evening it when I got the frame so really turn around was a day.
>>
Also for up to 8x10 Costco and Wal-mart aren't too bad, have seen Costco poster prints and canvas that look good too. Wouldn't use them if selling to a customer but just to put on your's or a friends wall they're perfectly fine.
>>
ProDPI always seems to rank well from everything I've read.
I don't think I would use Walmart or Costco if you're expecting good results. They're fine for for people that use point and shoot cameras but if your composing shots and using a good glass why would you print mud?

http://improvephotography.com/7756/test-results-best-online-print-lab/

http://mcpactions.com/2014/01/15/pro-photo-lab-vs-consumer-photo-lab-battle/

https://rebeccadanzenbaker.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/consumer-photo-labs-vs-pro-photo-lab-shocking-results/
Thread posts: 14
Thread images: 1


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.