Is a printer worth it?

By 4 ??

agedbriar wrote in post #16389682
By 4 ??

I was approximating, but it is more than x2, but maybe not as much as I've assumed. I always print with moderate white borders as I like to frame using a mat and the borders allow me more flexibility when assembling. As an example, I would probably not want to print more than 9 x 6 inches on A4 and that's not that far off a quarter of what I do on A3+ to give me similar borders.

cdifoto wrote in post #16388023
Because there are professionals who do it day in and day out better, cheaper, more efficiently, and with no hassle on your part...?

Having complete control doesn't make it inherently superior.

Maybe not, but it makes it yours.

Hen3Ry wrote in post #16389992
Maybe not, but it makes it yours.

How far down that rabbit-hole do you want to fall?

I didn't grind the glass in my lenses, nor did I design the sensor in the body... guess these photos aren't really mine after all?

Hen3Ry wrote in post #16389992
Maybe not, but it makes it yours.

Considering the print from the professionals looks as exactly like what's on my screen as possible, that photo was mine the moment I decided to capture it.

cdifoto wrote in post #16390760
Considering the print from the professionals looks as exactly like what's on my screen as possible, that photo was mine the moment I decided to capture it.

That's the big difference between printing in the modern digital age when all the processing has been done to the image before the the printing process even starts. This is the complete opposite to the days of film where almost all of the "clever" processing and even things such as getting the crop correct are down to the person actually printing the image. Lets face it the only difference between using my printer at home or at the lab, as I have all processing/autocorrect options turned off, is that I have to wait for the courier to drop off the prints the next morning.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #16390895
That's the big difference between printing in the modern digital age when all the processing has been done to the image before the the printing process even starts. This is the complete opposite to the days of film where almost all of the "clever" processing and even things such as getting the crop correct are down to the person actually printing the image. Lets face it the only difference between using my printer at home or at the lab, as I have all processing/autocorrect options turned off, is that I have to wait for the courier to drop off the prints the next morning.

Alan

Precisely. We're not talking about film here. Printing digital at home has its merits but they aren't based on craftsmanship or pride of accomplishment.

cdifoto wrote in post #16391066
Precisely. We're not talking about film here. Printing digital at home has its merits but they aren't based on craftsmanship or pride of accomplishment.

So then. You believe that a print is a print? No modifications to it after you print? You will always be happy with the first print you see, whatever the source? The printing mechanism is just a big complicated xerox device, that spits out the exact same image each time, and you'll always be happy with the first one?

OK. But this sort of excludes the idea that an LCD and paper are different media, doesn't it? And also that printing on different paper types or using different inks produces different images? But still, you'll always be happy with the first print you see?

Just sayin'

Hen3Ry wrote in post #16395488
So then. You believe that a print is a print? No modifications to it after you print? You will always be happy with the first print you see, whatever the source? The printing mechanism is just a big complicated xerox device, that spits out the exact same image each time, and you'll always be happy with the first one?

OK. But this sort of excludes the idea that an LCD and paper are different media, doesn't it? And also that printing on different paper types or using different inks produces different images? But still, you'll always be happy with the first print you see?

Just sayin'

Where in the world did you get that out of what I've posted?

BigAl007 wrote in post #16390895
That's the big difference between printing in the modern digital age when all the processing has been done to the image before the the printing process even starts. This is the complete opposite to the days of film where almost all of the "clever" processing and even things such as getting the crop correct are down to the person actually printing the image. Lets face it the only difference between using my printer at home or at the lab, as I have all processing/autocorrect options turned off, is that I have to wait for the courier to drop off the prints the next morning.

Alan

cdifoto wrote in post #16391066
Precisely. We're not talking about film here. Printing digital at home has its merits but they aren't based on craftsmanship or pride of accomplishment.

Hmm, I'd take a somewhat different viewpoint. I see digital printing as still the "final process" of the craftsmanship, but like the film days sometimes that "final process" is in the hands of a printer with the equipment and skills to deliver a high-quality finished product in an efficient and cost-effective way.

The point that We have been trying to get across is that for printing in the digital domain; where there is no human intervention in the printing process between sending the digital file to the printing device, and the finnished print comming out the other end it dosen't matter where the printer is located. It makes zero difference to the quality of the print. You still have to send the printing device a suitable file, and it may take a few attempts to get right, but that is the same for your home inkjet or a Fuji Frontier at a lab.

Back in the days of film making good prints was a separate art in it's self. At the very basic level the printer (person not machine) would need to set up the crop if the film and paper formats were different. Beyond that they would have to do the dodging and burning and all the other tricks (which still retain the same names) that we now do in Photoshop.

This reminds me of the issues around that press pohto competetion. In the days of film any right minded press photographer needing a big print for a competetion of that type would have gone to one of the better known printers who just made quality prints for others. The fact that the person printing the image may have used doging and burning along with othe techniques would have been seen as normal. Whar would not have been accepted was retouching to remove or add elements, or multiple exposures of different negatives.

Alan

cdifoto wrote in post #16395513
Where in the world did you get that out of what I've posted?

Then what, exactly, are they based on. Mechanical repro? "Oh, you like that image? Well, I don't have any pride in it or sense of accomplishment. I just hung it because there's a hole in the wall."

[edit]

Don't get me wrong. If I wanted to print 20 images, I'd send them to Costco. Much cheaper. But first, I'd spend some time making sure that it prints the way I want it. Since they are different media, you can more easily tell if you're finished PP by printing and hanging it on a wall. I'm blessed or cursed, depending on how you look at it, in that I have a light well in my house, that provides pure undifferentiated light during the entire day. Once I've done soft-proofing, I print and hang. Then if I still like what I see, I'm done, but if not, not. This can be the final step in a low volume production system, which is what I have, or it can be the middle step in producing multiple images at Costco for someone much more professional or accomplished than I am.

On the other hand, I think printing is a skill that one learns, and that some people are better at it than others. Just as post-production is.

[/edit]

Hen3Ry,

Are you a hobbyist or a pro?

I ask because I bought my photo printing gear (and thought similar to you) when photography was a hobby but as soon as it became my full time business and time, cost and consistency became more important to me I abandoned the home printing and found a good local lab that I know will produce top quality prints, quickly and at very good rates.

I got a deal on an epson that could print 13x19 (thrift store). I spent 25$ on the printer, but I've spent hundreds of dollars on ink. I must have spent $50 on ink just trying to calibrate it and I still don't have it 100%. I use it when I want prints fast. If I want prints right, use bay photo, costco, MPIX or other online photo service.

I was actually getting really great prints out of my Epson (R2400) but the hassles weren't worth it. It's slow to print and then there's drying time before they can be handled for cutting then cutting itself.

I lost my sanity on a large order of wallets.