How many of you print you images, and if so how?

[olakiril]

A couple of decades ago I used to have a darkroom. Then moved to digital and after a long period of being loyal to my monitor , I started using online printing sites with some pretty decent results. But now I am thinking of getting into home printing to hopefully bring back some of that "home creation" feeling.
Learning quite a bit the last few weeks, I have decided to go with a Canon Pro300. The upfront cost is quite high so I still have my doubts.
What do you think about home printing?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I don't have darkroom. I'm using bathroom in the basement to print under enlarger.
Room next to it has my PC with printer attached.

I have Epson 88C+. It was still made, sold until recently. It was under 100 USD printer. I have mine for some years now. If you not printing in large quantities here is no point in expensive printer.

I print because it is part of the process been independent. I'm also asked for prints and giving away sometimes.

If I need high quality, larger than Letter size, I'm lucky to have LCS not to far with very experienced printer. But I need it very rarely.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

I've been printing 13x19" prints at home for years now. The inks have gotten so good you really can no longer distinguish "dry" prints from "wet" prints. I don't miss the darkroom experience at all! The experience is not cheap though (paper and ink) - and if you let your printer sit for an extended period of time you can run through a full set of inks performing nozzle checks. But in the end I believe it's worth it.

One small piece of advice though: get the widest printer that will fit in the space you have for it. It's sort of like buying a big-screen TV - you'll never regret going larger.

Canon and Epson 13", 17", and 24" wide printers should last for many years.

 

[olakiril]

I don't have darkroom. I'm using bathroom in the basement to print under enlarger.
Room next to it has my PC with printer attached.

I have Epson 88C+. It was still made, sold until recently. It was under 100 USD printer. I have mine for some years now. If you not printing in large quantities here is no point in expensive printer.

I print because it is part of the process been independent. I'm also asked for prints and giving away sometimes.

If I need high quality, larger than Letter size, I'm lucky to have LCS not to far with very experienced printer. But I need it very rarely.

Thanks Ko.Fe. for you input. Yeah my darkroom was my bathroom as well

That is definitely a solution that I am thinking. There two reasons really for going that high on the price range:
1. I have read that pigment based inks produce much better B&W results with almost no tint which bothers me quite a bit. But enough to justify the cost? Not sure.
2. My current A4 do-it-all printer produces quite bad results in mat papers. And I don't like glossy. I am sure there are other papers like Luster that might do a bit better though.

And pigment printers are not cheap...

 

[olakiril]

I've been printing 13x19" prints at home for years now. The inks have gotten so good you really can no longer distinguish "dry" prints from "wet" prints. I don't miss the darkroom experience at all! The experience is not cheap though (paper and ink) - and if you let your printer sit for an extended period of time you can run through a full set of inks performing nozzle checks. But in the end I believe it's worth it.

One small piece of advice though: get the widest printer that will fit in the space you have for it. It's sort of like buying a big-screen TV - you'll never regret going larger.

Canon and Epson 13", 17", and 24" wide printers should last for many years.

Thanks Bill!
I have kind of calculated the operating costs and it looks close to what wet printing costed me I also plan on refilling the cartridges.

Although I would love a 17", a 13" is what I can handle at the moment. I have read that larger prints have even higher operating costs although you save a bit on the inks.

 

[Andrea Taurisano]

I used to have a darkroom, but for a number of reasons now only process my negatives there. During the last year of forced home stays (guess why..) I've been printing a selection of all my archive, over 20 years of scanned negatives, on Japanese rice paper, 4 images per A4-page, then archiving them in binders like you see below. The introduction of Epson EcoTank printers was for me a revolution, as it finally enables really cheap printing with a decent photo quality, more than good enough for my purpose, which is creating a tangible archive of all I've produced. Much better than tiny contact prints, IMO. Having no kids, it will all get trashed anyway, eventually, but at least those who do that will understand what it is.

 

[Darthfeeble]

I'm on my fourth 13x19 printer. "It isn't a photograph until it's on the wall". I'm using an Epson XP15000 printer, the easiest one yet to get good prints from.

 

[jsrockit]

I’ve had printers in the past, but I’m not printing enough to keep it running right. I don’t print high quality prints just to have them in the closet. I have a quality print shop very close to me that makes perfect archival prints on great papers. I use them when I need a print locally. If I’m part of a gallery show or working with a gallery, and they aren’t local, they let me know where I can have prints done that are up to their specifications. Other than that, for my personal printing... I prefer on demand books for bulk printing of images while I’m working on projects.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Of my best pictures I make a gelatine silver prints. I never make digital pictures, I only scan my prints.


Erik.

 

[Vince Lupo]

I'm using an Epson 3880 with the OEM inks for prints that I exhibit and sell, usually 11"x16" on 13"x19" paper. I'm very happy with the results that this printer produces, and I'm usually printing on Epson Legacy Platine paper. I've been thinking of replacing this printer, but this one is still working great so at this point I see no reason to upgrade.

I also just picked up a UV exposure bed, so I'll hopefully be back into some of the historic printing processes (platinum-palladium and cyanotypes) that I used to do years ago.

 

[Dogman]

I print most of what I shoot. Epson R3000, Epson pigment inks and matte rag paper--Epson, Hahnemuhle, Canson...nice papers. 90% or more is B&W. Mostly I print 6x9 on 8.5x11 these days. I print so much I have no place to store anything larger although the print will do 13x19. Other than I love the look of a photograph printed on paper, I cannot justify printing. But that's reason enough for me. Personal satisfaction only. To my eyes paper printing adds an indefinable depth to the image no screen can equal. Plus I like the tactility.

Many years ago, I went through a long period when I had no place for a darkroom or, indeed, the money to buy the equipment for printing, processing, etc. During those drought years I completely quit taking pictures except for an occasional snapshot. For me there's no point in making photographs if I can't print them. Today, I can get better quality prints than I ever did in the darkroom.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Thanks Ko.Fe. for you input. Yeah my darkroom was my bathroom as well

That is definitely a solution that I am thinking. There two reasons really for going that high on the price range:
1. I have read that pigment based inks produce much better B&W results with almost no tint which bothers me quite a bit. But enough to justify the cost? Not sure.
2. My current A4 do-it-all printer produces quite bad results in mat papers. And I don't like glossy. I am sure there are other papers like Luster that might do a bit better though.

And pigment printers are not cheap...

I'm using not expensive inks cartridges from Amazon seller.
B/W on mate is not a problem with Epson C88+.
I'm getting real BW prints with it comparing to grey darkroom prints.

I like BW on gloss paper. Have to fool C88+ on this one. By selecting of plane paper. Heads needs some cleaning after it, but it is not expensive inks.

Mate Epson paper prints.

 

[Shac]

I have an Epson P800 very pleased with the out put, as I was from the Epson 3880 I had for several years before (it died). Print all sizes up to 17"x22" but most large prints are 13x19. I stick to one paper as it suits my needs (Epson Premium Lustre) and Epson inks.
Had my first chemical darkroom when I was 12 and built several afterwards, but would never go back. I still shoot B&W film and develop myself - then "scan" in with a digital camera.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Print a few; I send to Adorama for metal, CostCo for paper, or CanvasPop.

 

[Richard G]

I'm using an Epson 3880 with the OEM inks for prints that I exhibit and sell, usually 11"x16" on 13"x19" paper. I'm very happy with the results that this printer produces, and I'm usually printing on Epson Legacy Platine paper. I've been thinking of replacing this printer, but this one is still working great so at this point I see no reason to upgrade.

I am not in Vince's league but I have made some wonderful black and white prints with this printer with its second lot of OEM cartridges.

I use Ilford Galerie Gold Mono Silk black and white paper. The printer is too big to have at home and it sits on my kitchen bench at my office. My secretaries have never complained but I know they can't be thrilled about it. It is always under the plastic sleeve it came out of the box with. Thanks to the pandemic I have gone almost a year without printing a thing and after an automatic cleaning process at first start up in months it printed perfectly two weekends ago, including in colour.

The one picture of mine on the wall here at home would never have been seen again after shooting except for the print which almost had me fall over when it was half out of the printer.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I use an Epson P800 for both my color and B&W work; It allows me to make and sell prints up to 16x20 without depending on a lab for them.

 

[maigo]

I had a low end HP Photosmart 8100 series bought in 2008 and replaced last week. Used mostly for text printing. Have not printed many photos in past ten years.

Last week I bought a Canon Pixma Pro-200 (dye, max 13inx39in, 10 inks) while it was discounted to $699 (CAD).
Have not taken it out of the box yet as I have another big project to reduce paper archives in our home.
I have reached the 95c point and scanned and shredded (or just shredded) nearly 5 file boxes (25 years) or papers. 16in of papers per box, that is 80in or 200cm of papers. This took 10 days of 3-4 hours a day.
Phew, feels good to rid of that clutter.
Highly recommend the HP Scanjet Pro 2000 duplex scanner for this type of job.

Expecting to feel equally good when I can get my picks from 25 years worth of photos out of the Pixma Pro-200, onto the wall and in the hands of others.

 

[PRJ]

I still print black and white in the darkroom. For color I am currently using a Canon Pro 10 with Precision Color inks. I've been running those two methods side by side since '97. I also use the Pro 10 for digital negs. Sometimes I send out for something larger. I use a laser printer too for contact sheets. Good enough.

I avoid Epson printers like the plague. Wouldn't take one even if it was free...

 

[rfaspen]

Epson P800 here. We (my wife and I) print both color and BW up to 16x20 with very good satisfaction. Occasionally these prints sell.
I'm of the school of thought that a photograph does not achieve full status until it is a print.
"The print is king."

 

[Nitroplait]

I use a Canon Selphy dye-sublimation printer for workprints. It offers control and an attractive price/quality ratio compared to my alternatives - and not least hasselfree operation.
I have never managed to keep a photo quality ink-jet printer running for long, thus much money and time have been wasted that way.
For prints worth making larger, I'll send them out.