Posted by Rick Dunn on February 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM
I'm getting ready to get into a bigger printer and have been researching the Z3100 and the Epson 7880. Both appear more than capable, but reports of some quirky behavior on the Z3100 have me wondering if it'd be better to stick with Epson. Just curious if anyone on the forum has any first-hand experience with the HP?
Thanks for any insights!
Posted by Darren White on February 3, 2008 at 8:01 PM
I really have to ask this question...
Why would anyone want to do their own prints when there are so many high quality labs out there who can print your images at a fraction of the cost that you can....
with a high dollar printer like M.H has and all the ink you use on your mess ups.....why not just let someone else do it.....I am just curious....this is not a dig at anyone!
Posted by Rick Dunn on February 3, 2008 at 9:14 PM
No offense taken; it's a valid question. For me, the answer is simple: complete control from exposure to final product.
I sell enough prints every year to justify the expense, and the added hassle of having to deal with the inevitable change (paper, profiles, people) that any pro lab will go through... it's well worth my sanity to not have to deal with that nonsense. I've got 5 times as much money tied up in camera gear as I would be expending on a 24" printer, and that doesn't even include computer equipment. Making that kind of investment in capturing and processing the image, and then letting someone else produce the final output doesn't make sense to me.
Plus - and I'm sure that this varies widely - I really enjoy making my own prints. It's easily as satisfying as making a good exposure (maybe even more so); an art unto itself.
edit - oh, and why is Mark messing up so much? That's got to be expensive dude! Seriously, I run test prints on a small scale, and when I go to print something larger, it's exceedingly rare that I have to reprint.
Discussion
2 repliesThanks for any insights!
Why would anyone want to do their own prints when there are so many high quality labs out there who can print your images at a fraction of the cost that you can....
with a high dollar printer like M.H has and all the ink you use on your mess ups.....why not just let someone else do it.....I am just curious....this is not a dig at anyone!
I sell enough prints every year to justify the expense, and the added hassle of having to deal with the inevitable change (paper, profiles, people) that any pro lab will go through... it's well worth my sanity to not have to deal with that nonsense. I've got 5 times as much money tied up in camera gear as I would be expending on a 24" printer, and that doesn't even include computer equipment. Making that kind of investment in capturing and processing the image, and then letting someone else produce the final output doesn't make sense to me.
Plus - and I'm sure that this varies widely - I really enjoy making my own prints. It's easily as satisfying as making a good exposure (maybe even more so); an art unto itself.
edit - oh, and why is Mark messing up so much? That's got to be expensive dude!