Printer vs. Photo Lab

I would like to sell prints of my photos, but want to evaluate the options of purchasing a high quality printer versus sending my image files to a photo lab. I have owned lower-level Epson and Canon inkjet printers, and while both worked well, have never been happy about the frequency and cost of toner replacement. What are your experiences? Do you print your own prints that you sell, or do you prefer to leave the printing process to a photo lab? What have you found the cost, convenience, and quality tradeoffs to be?

Comments about your personal experience would be helpful. If I choose to purchase a printer, it would be in the range of the Canon PIXMA Pro-10.

Randy, for anything up to 13"x19" I do print at home, and the art of printmaking is probably one of my most favorite things in photography. My very first suggestion is to spend five bucks on Martin Bailey's eBook which you can buy on the Craft & Vision website. He covers the very questions you are asking, in addition to how to make great prints. Once you read this, you'll know if you want to pursue it or not, it's a great guide. I admit, the passion for printing did come from watching the 2007 and 2011 video sets called Camera to Print and Screen from Michael Reichmann's website, but those are 20+ hour video seminars that cover everything and focus on much larger printing. The eBook for $5 I think is the fastest way to your answer.

Once I started making my own prints I started feeling like I was creating art. The array of papers out there is mind boggling at first, but after some expensive trial and error I did finally come up with a set that covers most of what I shoot.

Just FYI, I use a Canon Pixma Pro9500 MKII which is the predecessor to the Pro-10 you are considering. I also have a Pro-100 which uses dye-based inks but my main fine art work is printed on the 9500. I think the Pro-10 is the best choice you could make for this.

If you decide to take the plunge, I would highly suggest going Canon over Epson (I used to be a big Epson fan, but no more and I'm probably going to start a war by saying all of this, lol) for three big reasons:

1) Epsons are clog machines and I'm DONE with them forever. No apologies, they clog and at the worst times. Since 2010 I've used a Canon Pro9000, Pro9500 MKII and the Pro-100 and never EVER had to run even so much as a head cleaning cycle, not ONCE, and that's with the printers being turned off for a few weeks sometimes.

2) For the longest time Epson would not write 16-bit drivers for the 13x19 and smaller printers. They may now but I really don't know. Canon has had 16-bit drivers for years, ever since Windows 7 hit the scene in 2009 (Win 7 isn't 16-bit native like Mac OSX, but it has a feature called XPS Print Path that a printer manufacturer can leverage if they choose to spend money and time writing 16 bit drivers, which Canon did). The difference is huge when printing skies and other gentle gradients, I simply do not get banding with 16 bit printing, which technically is a 14 bit image getting pushed to the printer in a 15 bit container, but it's still hugely better than 8 bit.

3) Changeable print heads: if you print heads fail on an Epson, you have to send the whole printer in for service or toss the printer in the can. Canon's print heads are easily changeable and replaceable, although I've never had one go on me because their heads don't clog, lol!

So, FWIW, here are the 13"x19" papers I've come to really like and the types of prints I use them for:

GLOSSY
-Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta 325 GSM: this is a coated baryta-based dense paper for high detail images that require glossier finish but where the wet look is not desired. It also makes rich B&W's. It has a very slight texture to it that is just infectious (to me... others may not prefer it and that's cool, this is definitely subjective). There is also a Bright White 350 GSM version that I also use that's more pure white, not warm-toned.
-Canon Pro Platinum II: this is a super high gloss wet-look paper that is totally stunning if that type of surface is desired. Works great for prints not going under glass, but also works well if non-glare museum glass is used (although that kills the effect of the Optical Brightening Agents in this paper)
-Red River 80 lb Polar Pearl Metallic: if you like the look of that Kodak Metallic paper, this will give it to you!

SMOOTH MATTE
-Red River 60lb Polar Matte, very affordable, awesome matte finish, more of a true white. Besides landscape images, wedding portraits look amazing on this paper.
-Hahnemuhle Ultra Smooth 305: similar to the RR Polar Matte, but a touch warmer.

PORTRAIT MATTE (my weird category, it's matte but denser, but still awesome for landscapes)
-Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 310 Bright White: this could be the definitive matte paper, it's dense and has great "tooth" (the feel of the surface), and looks outrageous for landscape, portraits, black & whites, you name it. It's not cheap; it's a paper you go to when you've got printing down to a science and you want the best in class for your customers. It's almost overkill for a landscape image that might end up matted and framed because RR Polar Matte will work just as well, because once under glass, the feel" and all that is irrelevant so you might as well save some bucks. But when you hand a potential wedding client a sample 13x19 portrait printed on the Photo Rag 310 and they see and feel the beauty, they don't even blink at the $75-$90 price of an unmounted print.
-Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308: same paper just more warm-toned.
-Breathing Color Optica One: this is supposed to be the new kid in town and this paper is getting rave reviews, I have yet to sample it but will do that soon. Another popular paper in this realm is Moab's Entrada Rag, also another I have yet to try. As you can tell, I'm a big Hahnemuhle fan. They've been making paper since 1584 so I'm kind of into the 500-year heritage thing they have going.

LUSTER
-Hahnemuhle Fine Art Pearl 285 GSM: take your Photo Rag Matte and add just a thin layer of sheen borrowed from the Fine Art Baryta and you've got this excellent pearl paper. Warm-toned landscapes look superb on this because it's not really glossy but has some sheen to preserve detail.
-Canon Pro Luster: this is very nice when someone wants a more traditional photograph paper, like a well-done print coming off of a big machine. The beauty of this paper is that it delivers a really nice image and you can often get it bundled with other Canon deals, probably even when you got to buy a printer. It's nice stuff, detail looks great, obviously not like a fine art photo rag but certainly professional looking. Great paper to cut your teeth on if you get a pack for free.
-Ilford makes Gold Fibre Silk in various degrees of sheen, but it's a bit expensive. Just thought I'd mention it.

WATERCOLOR RAG
-OK, if you nail a gorgeous foggy forest shot and slam it with the Orton effect and want this thing to look like an outstanding watercolor work of art, Hahnemuhle Museum Etching is your paper. It is very similar to Moab's Somerset Velvet but a whole lot denser and a much more interesting texture IMO. Moab's Somerset is still a beautiful rag paper but it feels so thin, I'm getting hooked on the dense papers from Hahnemuhle more and more.

Whew, I sure didn't plan to take the discussion this far, but you caught me on the tail end of 3 years of trial and error and research, and I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting and just wanted to share all of this. I probably should get to sleep, alarm goes off in a few hours, but I hope this helps your quest. Rats, I want to stay up and make prints now, lol!

Paul, thank you for the detailed and comprehensive reply. It sounds as though the home printing process, along with post-processing on the computer, can be a big part of the new "digital darkroom."

My next step will be to purchase Mr. Bailey's eBook to help decide whether I want to print my photos at home. It should be a good small investment.

Thanks again, Paul.

Everyone, your opinions about home printing versus a photo lab, from quality, convenience, and costs perspectives, are invited.

Hi Randy:

Paul had his clear preference for printers, but I'd like to chime in. I've been using Epson printers for years with NO issues at all with clogging. I don't do anything special with my printers, follow the guidance to turn them off using the printer button, not a power strip, etc. Maybe it is the climate, or other factors. I don't know. My Epson 3880 is absolutely stellar. I've had the opportunity to use Canon printers supplied by Canon for a workshop. After using them, and the Canon print driver, I MUCH prefer the Epson prints and interface. To each his own. Just thought I'd add my 2 cents.

There you go Randy, a totally happy Epson user... And as Keith said, we have our clear preferences. I've never used a 3880 but Keith has and it sounds like a winner, and his opinion is highly valued by us all. As you said, check out the eBook first, that will help you decide if this is a trail you want to hike.

Hi Paul and Keith: Thank you both for your input. It's great that you are both pleased with your brand and model of printers. You have provided some good advice and reading the eBook will help me choose the path.

Hi Randy - I use MPIX printing services associated with my Zenfolio website for selling prints to the general pubilic but I also use an Epson 2880 printer (13"X19" max) for prints for family and friends. I am very happy with the quality of prints from MPIX as well as my Epson 2880.

Hi Eva,

Thank you for the information about MPIX and the Epson 2880 printer. I will check into both of them.

I've used MPix too, very happy with the results and the way they pack.

I have used West Coast Imaging with good luck earlier in my photography, but now print myself. I cannot imagine not printing myself. I make a test print, tweak the file, reprint and repeat numerous times on many images. I would hate to give up the ability to do that.

My old 4800 clogged so badly that I gave it up and just picked up an Epson 3880. I am getting it dialed in, but so far, so good.

Paul and Harley, thank you for your recommendations. I will probably purchase a high quality photo printer within the next 6 months, but checked out MPIX based on Eva's and Paul's recommendation, and placed my first order for two 20" X 30" and one 24" X 36" prints a moment ago. It was a good shopping experience, I can't wait until they arrive! My living room needs the photos for decoration.