How do you print your digital photos?

[Wickerman]

Poll question: How do you print your digital photos?

I've been using digital cameras since about '97 or so, from some real early Casios to Sony Mavicas to a nice Minolta. Most of what I do I archive on CD or on webpages. I really don't print my shots. On rare occasion I use a decent laser printer with photo paper to print a special shot.

This Christmas I bought Mrs. Wickerman a digital. She loves it, but we are looking for an easy to use, cost effective way to print the photos - I need your ideas!

[okieinpain]

1. take them to the local walgreen store.

[tyedyeto]

4. So do I

and get a CD of the pics too!

[qnr]

2. Photo printer for me n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

3. I have the Kodak printer dock

...the pictures are fantastic, and the ink doesn't fade.

[Deja Q]

5. Epson Stylus Photo 2200 or R800, or the Canon i9900

Nothing else begins to match, and I prefer Epson's pigment ink to Canon's dye ink any day of the week.

[Wickerman]

14. A 700$ printer?

I guess if we did volume it might pay off. :shrug:

[Deja Q]

20. Or sold your own prints. Ain't no frigging way I trust any of those

stores.

My photos are my copyright and I will defend them with my life's blood.

While the stores have big placards saying they protect corporate copyrights, they say NOTHING about ours, nor do they say anything about keeping the material you insert into their machine. Maybe it's tinfoiley, but if they're vehement about protecting corporate copyright (pardon me while I go giggle even thought they do have a point), you can bet they've at least toyed with the idea of surreptitiously spying on the stuff you scan into their system, assuming they don't do anything more. That's tinfoil, mind you.

And, again, quality. It's worth the price. I don't buy into the 29 cent claptrap or the typical repukie-dukie "gotta be low price, always!" thuggie mentality.

[Wickerman]

24. you make good points

and yeah, the corporate copyright bullshit annoys me. We tried to have copies made of an old family photo from a studio that is long out of business - we were told we needed to have permission of the copyright holder. They were willing to protect that copyright, but yeah, they give wit about mine, I'm positive.

"gotta be low price, always!"
I have family who won't go to Walmart except to have their digital images printed. :shrug: Its all the same, ain't it? Still a wrong-headed business even if cheap for digital printing.

[MercutioATC]

35. It only pays if you're printing 8x10 or larger.

It's cheaper to get 4x6 and 5x7 done commercially.

[Kellanved]

6. use a professional service

The prints are a lot cheaper than with any consumer class ink printer and a lot better too.
You don't save money by printing them yourself - you'd have to buy a printer and the ink/toner can easily cost you several dollars for a single photo.

[Deja Q]

8. For one Epson premium semigloss page:

$0.68 per page. $1 worth of combined ink.

It's cheaper, but don't forget: My printer's output is rated for 100 years. Yon walgreens photo will last 20-30.

"You get what you pay for."

In theory. :D

No need to worry about porno pics either. :evilgrin:

[Kellanved]

13. I disagree

The service's prints are far more durable than almost anything a printer could produce (unless you use really expensive archive-grade paper). Also, few printers are able to match the 5000dpi equivalent professional photo printers bring to bear.

[Deja Q]

21. For DPI, you are correct. Of course,

(a) most people get 4x6" prints - why waste the money for even that?

(b) longevity - your response to me doesn't address that issue. A no-say is worse than bad news.

Of course, it's all hyperbole in terms of longevity right now. I've only witnessed color prints fade after 15 years where it'll be another 13 before my Epson prints can be properly compared. (though I can say I've made bumper stickers using paper that other people say goes bad with fading after 3 weeks for over a YEAR with NO FADING, so I know Epson's claims are not based on utter fantasy.)

[Kellanved]

28. I don't know about Epson's claims

The problem is not just the ink fading, it's the paper. The prints have exactly the same problems as "normal" photos - and there may be major differences between different producers - time will tell, I guess.

The estimated life of a photo print is 30 years. In all reviews I've read, Epson inks ended up in the midfield, doing especially poor at skin tones.

[qnr]

9. Yeah, but Walgreens can't hand out copies of photographs

at a BBQ with relatives and friends that are only in town for a few hours.

[Kellanved]

10. For such cases I do have a color-laser

Not quite the quality of an ink-printer, but the prints are cheaper and more durable. Besides: in emergencies I could use the 60 minute service at any Fuji-outlet.

[qnr]

11. Yeah, but you don't have to drive 40 miles on a 50cc scooter to

get to one :)

[qnr]

15. Yeah, I am using "Yeah" a lot today, yeah? n/t

[Kellanved]

17. Yup

You do have a point though.

[Deja Q]

23. I disagree.

Even a $300 inkjet has 4 times the resolution of a typcal laser (2400 compared to 600) and they (according to simulated tests) last for decades on archive quality paper. "Not quite", as you said, speaks volumes regarding the efficacy of a laser printer for photo printing. :-)

You also got on my case about cost. Laser toner alone is FAR more expensive than any inkjet could even hope to compare with, never mind the cost of the printer itself (or its drum kit, transfer kit, fusion kit, et al) In other words, laserjet printers for photos are still anything but cost effective. So please forgive my ignorance, but I can't possibly see how a laserjet can even begin to outperform a high-end inkjet in terms of cost, never mind cost/performance (resolution) ratio.

One thing I did miss, how do you define "durable"? I can think of a few ways.

[Fifth of Five]

7. Walgreens for me too.

I use the do-it-yourself computer.

[DebinTx]

12. I use the Kodak printer dock too.

Piece of cake to use, great pictures and I don't have to bother with any store to make additional copies.

[CanuckAmok]

16. I'm still using a small team of Benedictine Monks.

Takes a while, but I really like the personal touch.

And now that I've switched from candles to incandescent bulbs, they couldn't be happier!

[Wickerman]

19. They work for wine and bread?

lol, this is what I get for posting in the Lounge.

:hi:

[CanuckAmok]

26. All I can think of is Edward Woodward screaming:

O-O-O-H, CHRI-I-I-I-ST, NO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O!!!! NO-O-O-O-O-O-O!! CHRI-I-I-S-S-S-T!! NO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O!!!!!!!!!!!

[amazona]

18. walgreens or online service

I used to print on my own color printer but it is not worth the expense unless you are really serious about printing as opposed to making archives on CD or online.

[qnr]

22. You just need to know where to shop :)

For example, up in Maine, I used Mardens, here in Oklahoma, I use Walls ( http://www.wallsbargaincenter.com/default.htm ). They sell Insurance Loss, Salvage and Closeout Merchandise. For example, after the hurricanes in Florida, they had huge quantities of merchandise from various office supply stores down there. I picked up photo paper at about 12% of what I'd have to pay locally. Same with the ink.

[ZombieNixon]

25. With a printer. n/t

[Frogtutor]

27. I used to get film developed on to CD, and my digital photos, I uploaded

to Ofoto.com and ordered prints from them. Recently, my mom bought me an all-in-one fax, copier, printer that has a place to plug in the memory sticks from different cameras (5 different sizes!) and you can edit and print your photos straight from the printer. I've only used it once since I got it, as a test, and it created a beautiful print--I was impressed with the quality. I think the printer cost around $200. It's an HP PSC 2355xi all-in-one.

[kostya]

29. You can get regular weight glossy paper for prints, a lot cheaper

than photo print paper and they look great. Really good if you make prints and send them to overseas friends, saves on postage. - K

[SW FL Dem]

30. I have a photo printer

but the quality is somewhat lacking. I use it for printing pics for mass mailing (like kiddie pics for holiday cards) but not for pictures I want to save for posterity. Most home photo printers use cheaper inks than professional prints so the photos fade after a few years. For pics I am going to put in frames or albums, I have them printed at Costco. It's easy, I take my camera to the store, plug the memory card into the photo computer, pic the prints I want and have them print them. It takes an hour and I get pro quality prints for .19 apiece. I have tried the Kodak kiosks at Walgreens and Target, and find the Costco computer to be much more user friendly and it's a lot cheaper.

[Wickerman]

31. Thanks all for your input. I got a nice PM suggesting winkflash.com

and must say it looks promising.

Size Cost Per Print
4 x 6 16¢ each
4 x 5.3 16¢ each
3.25 x 5 16¢ each
5 x 7 29¢ each
5 x 6.6 29¢ each
6 x 8 79¢ each
8 x 10 $1.99 each
8 x 10.6 $1.99 each
10 x 13 $4.50 each
Wallets(4) 39¢ for sheet of 4

$1.00 service charge on all orders.

[barackmyworld]

32. Online services are great

There are a ton, you can find them using google. Most offer 10 or 15 free photos the first time you sign up, so I signed up at a couple and printed all of my favorite digital photos. The quality is amazing, nobody can tell they are digital! All I can think of is snapfish and imagestation right now, but there are many more.

A tip--make sure that if you have cropped your photos, that they are the same proportions.

[tk2kewl]

33. i give the camera to my wife

}(

[politicat]

34. HP Deskjet 3550, glossy clay coat photo paper and iPhoto.

The printer is pretty high quality and it works with my Mac and my wireless network, which a lot of the dedicated photo printers don't. It does 1200 dpi, which is fine to my eye. If I want a matte finish on the pictures, I spray them with matte chalk setative that I get at the art store. It takes a bit of practice, but it's not hard.

I use an Olympus Camedia c-5000 5.0 MP camera with an external flash and lens adapters. I find that my prints with the camera and my printer actually seem better than the standard prints, off the rack photo processing, I get from the film camera.

YMMV.

[MercutioATC]

36. I have a Canon S9000 for big pics and get small ones done commercially.

It costs me a little over $2 to print an 8x10 and a little under $5 to print a 13x19. That's a real savings.

For 4x6 or 5x7s, any commercial photo shop is cheaper.