inkjet vs laser for printing pics
Feb 11, 2015 09:41:05 #
I've been printing pics on my inkjet printer & getting nice results. However, I'm wondering if laser would look better. Or is it just about the right paper? (& of course my own modest abilities)
Feb 11, 2015 09:45:45 #
oldogfoto wrote:
I've been printing pics on my inkjet printer & getting nice results. However, I'm wondering if laser would look better. Or is it just about the right paper? (& of course my own modest abilities)
Overall a laser printer is a very poor choice for printing photographs.
Feb 12, 2015 06:14:14 #
oldogfoto wrote:
I've been printing pics on my inkjet printer & getting nice results. However, I'm wondering if laser would look better. Or is it just about the right paper? (& of course my own modest abilities)
It won't.
Feb 12, 2015 08:14:20 #
oldogfoto wrote:
I've been printing pics on my inkjet printer & getting nice results. However, I'm wondering if laser would look better. Or is it just about the right paper? (& of course my own modest abilities)
As has been said, lasers are not good photo printers. However, paper counts too. Try a few on the printer manufacturer's recommended papers and compare.
Feb 12, 2015 08:42:33 #
The very highest end of the printing market is occupied by inkjet printers!
Laser-powered electrostatic printing devices are great for high volume copying and printing in an office environment. But they are not stable enough, and/or high-resolution enough, for serious photo printing.
Even a $100 inkjet from Epson is a better choice than most lasers... IF you use it with Epson inks and Epson papers and the Epson ICC profiles installed with the Epson printer driver.
The same is true for other brands... Stick with their inks, papers, drivers, and profiles. They are a matched set, designed and optimized for performance!
Laser-powered electrostatic printing devices are great for high volume copying and printing in an office environment. But they are not stable enough, and/or high-resolution enough, for serious photo printing.
Even a $100 inkjet from Epson is a better choice than most lasers... IF you use it with Epson inks and Epson papers and the Epson ICC profiles installed with the Epson printer driver.
The same is true for other brands... Stick with their inks, papers, drivers, and profiles. They are a matched set, designed and optimized for performance!
Feb 12, 2015 08:43:03 #
mikegreenwald
Loc: Illinois
All above is correct, but there is a wide variation between inkjet printers too. Dedicated photo printers, particularly those that use multiple pigment ink sources such as the Canon Pixma Pro 1 and others including several Epson printers do a much better job than any multifunction printer that I am aware of.
Feb 12, 2015 09:53:19 #
I found I got "fair to OK" prints with my old Epson C88+ printer and it didn't seem to matter too much what brand paper I used (mostly glossy).
About a year ago I bought a Canon PIXMA PRO 9000 MK II photo printer from a friend who had upgraded to a newer Canon printer; it makes a huge improvement in print quality. I now use only Canon or Red River papers; the Canon ICC profiles are preloaded in the software and updates for new Canon papers are available online as are profiles for the Red River papers. Take a look at www.redriverpapers.com. for more info on printers and their best papers for a particular printing project using whatever printer you have.
About a year ago I bought a Canon PIXMA PRO 9000 MK II photo printer from a friend who had upgraded to a newer Canon printer; it makes a huge improvement in print quality. I now use only Canon or Red River papers; the Canon ICC profiles are preloaded in the software and updates for new Canon papers are available online as are profiles for the Red River papers. Take a look at www.redriverpapers.com. for more info on printers and their best papers for a particular printing project using whatever printer you have.
Feb 12, 2015 10:01:47 #
mikegreenwald wrote:
All above is correct, but there is a wide variation between inkjet printers too. Dedicated photo printers, particularly those that use multiple pigment ink sources such as the Canon Pixma Pro 1 and others including several Epson printers do a much better job than any multifunction printer that I am aware of.
Yes, they certainly can. HP, Canon, and Epson all make great photo printers that use pigmented inks for print permanence.
The least expensive pigmented printer on Epson's site goes for about $500. The least expensive PRO pigmented printer they have goes for about $1300.
Most folks are not going to spend that much on a printer that isn't used all the time, however. For casual use, Epson's all-in-ones do a reasonable job.
I often tell folks who don't want to invest in a printer that they should work with a local pro lab. Get the lab's printer profiles and install them on your computer. Work with a calibrated monitor, and follow the lab's instructions for WYSIWWP (what you see (on your monitor) is what we print (in the lab) results).
Feb 12, 2015 13:56:19 #
oldogfoto wrote:
The only thing I've found better than inkjet photo printers is Xerox's line of solid ink Phaser's. Downside is cost and if they have a problem can be a real bear to repair sometimes.I've been printing pics on my inkjet printer & getting nice results. However, I'm wondering if laser would look better. Or is it just about the right paper? (& of course my own modest abilities)
Laser's are great general purpose printers, but not as a dedicated photo printer.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.