barrdennis

You need to look into profiles for your printer, there is three thing to being a good photographer, taking the picture, editing the pictures, and printing the pictures and they all require different skills. Denny Barr

mikedidi46 Loc: WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA

I am currently using a Canon 2500 series and it is impressive in the photo imaging

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Four years of use out of a printer is pretty good, especially if it was frequently used. Maybe it's just "worn out ". It happens to every machine.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

I use the Epson 1430, 13"x19". I converted it to the Ink Products system of CIS (constant ink supply) the colors are beautiful and you can print as much as you like for very little money, plus not having to have extra cartridges on hand. The quality of the prints is great.

JCam Loc: MD Eastern Shore

I think there is some information missing from this post: Exactly what are your complaints with your existing printer? "Blah" results may be the results of improper post processing, poor exposures, too high an expectation from a 'so-so' print, color calibration and/or cost of ink. Are you using Canon Inks or 'knock-offs? If the latter, that may be your problem. Most of us here using Canon printers are quite satisfied with our results. Personally, I'm using an older Canon PIXMA PRO 9000, MK II and only Canon inks!

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

If the pro 100 was good for 4 years and the going rate for this printer is about $149 with rebates, why not just get another pro 100? Moving over to an equivalent Epson will be a lot more costly.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=canon+pixma+pro-100&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

patnjed

I think it is worn out! But I thought maybe I have overlooked something. Thanks

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

My thoughts exactly

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

The Pro 1000. Larger prints, uses pigment ink instead of dye ink; I've seen it in action. 17x22 max size paper. $1300

What is it about the 100 that you don't like? I have it and love it. Wireless, smooth, accurate, cheap to run. I would like to be able to do 17x22 though.

bweber Loc: Newton, MA

I use a Canon Pro 10 and I am very happy with the prints I get, even from highly cropped images. My monitor is calibrated once a month using colormunki, and I always use the manufacturers profiles for the paper I use. I also discovered that if you purchase Canon inks on line from Canon they always include an assortment of printing papers for free. Most of the canon papers are not bad and I use them for regular prints. I now have a large inventory of Canon paper in all sizes.

Menkaure Loc: Michigan

Just DON'T buy a HP printer!!!!! I prefer Epson.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Although I use Epson printers, I agree with all the respondents about the Canon Pro 100. It is considered a very good printer, especially for its price. I have heard they get you on the ink costs, but so do they all. I agree, you're going to need to say what you don't like about the results you're getting to get much help. If you just want to make bigger prints, then but the next size up. If you're looking for other recommendations then try something like the Epson P800, or for the same size prints, the Epson P600. Just understand that to get good prints you need to put in some effort. When just starting it is very confusing, but if you stick with it, you will get much better results. Best of luck.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

If you are getting poor results with the Canon Pro 100, I suspect something is set amiss. I don't have that printer, but many others here do, and swear by it. It has a GREAT reputation.

Is your monitor capable of displaying 100% or more of at least the sRGB color space? (90+% of Adobe RGB would be nice!)
Do you calibrate your monitor with a colorimeter or spectrophotometer and software (XRITE and DataColor sell these kits)
Are you adjusting images in a low light level (about 105 candelas per square meter, +/- 20)
Is the print viewing box matched in intensity to your monitor, and using a 5000K fluorescent tube with 91 or better Color Rendering Index?
Have you correctly activated your monitor profile in both the operating system AND your post-processing software?
Is your software set up to read the color profile correctly from your files?
Is your software set up to use the CORRECT profile for the EXACT paper you are printing?
Are you printing with profile conversion in your software OR your printer driver, but not both places?

Answers to the above should be YES. If you don't understand the questions, you have a LOT of reading to do on ICC Color Management for Photographic Reproduction. Do an Internet search...

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Yep! That about covers it! Well Done Bill!

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

These two statements conflict.
New member; only post. I think this thread is just to cause controversy.