Do You Print or use a lab?

[Sanda]

Do you all print your own photos for your customers or do you send then to a lab for professional printing? I've been happy with the results from my printer to date but I'm starting to think that maybe I should get them printed by a lab which might or might not improve the quality and maybe work out cheaper than printing myself. What do you do?

[Ed_L]

Since I only do prints for family, I do the printing on my inkjet. But if I had a business, I think I would opt for lab printing. Regardless of what the ink manufacturers claim for longevity, I would feel more confident if a professional lab made the prints.

Ed

[thomasgeorge]

I do all my printing in house. I didnt notice any difference in the quality of prints done by outside sources and my own, but I also spent lots and lots of time becoming familiar with my printer and all its quirks, etc.. As probably 60% of my business is from repeat customers, I assume they find quality acceptable.. Tom

[CCdesktop]

I have tried operating in the best of both worlds. Some people seem to be perfectly happy to have inkjet quality output for prints, especially if they are having several done at one time.

I have cultivated a relationship with a printing service not far from my home - where I know the service is reliable, fast, and not overpriced. I take 300 dpi TIF files to them and get 2-day service. I think the quality exceeds the injet - they look like photos taken yesterday. It all depends on the client and what they want to achieve. I'd rather just hand off a CD though, I don't like to spend the time on the full service.

[G Mantero]

I mix mine about 75-25 in favor of getting a lab to print. Nothing beats being able to hand clients an actual archival photograph. As Ed mentioned, I'm just not secure with giving someone an inkjet print when they're in need of a photograph.

However, I do make the inkjet prints available--some clients aren't all that concerned with longevity, so the cost savings sway them to the inkjet prints, which are VERY good (Epson 1280). Sometimes clients want large quantities of prints, in which case they sometimes order inkjets instead of lab prints.

If you go with a lab, find one and build a relationship with them. Tour their facility and meet their staff so they recognize your name and face. Ask questions about what kinds of files they love/hate. You'll get much better quality from a printer when you know exactly what their capabilities are.

Gina

[Sanda]

Thanks everybody, I was going to invest in a new printer at a cost of around $2000. But I think for the moment I may try using lab prints but giving my customers the option of injet prints as a money saving opotion. Your thoughts on the matter have helped me greatly.

[DJ Dubovsky]

I have done both but the experience I've had matching colors to the outside printer caused me to buy a printer I could print my own on. Now I do exclusively inkjet but if I get a photo enlargement bigger than 11 x 14 I have to go to the printers and in that case I still get an inkjet print from them.
DJ

[fury]

Personally I invested in an "Epson stylus Photo EX" Quite a few years ago. While I've seen some great prints made with that model it seems to be by people who have it hooked up to their macs. Everyone I know who's printing with the same model ( I know a few) and hooked to a pc gets poop for prints...myself included. To make a long story only slightly shorter, I don't need the agrivation in my life. I go to a lab that does an amazing job and I don't get the head-aches. The cost of the print is payed by the client anyway (and then some ). I have nothing but respect for the imagers out there who do their own, but I'm perfectly happy admiring them at a large distance and not partaking in what Seems to be masochism of the highest order.

[BigAl]

I prefer to print myself. Anyone who has read Margulis's book, or been on his listserv will know how difficult it is for the lab to get the colors exactly right (regardless of how much effort you put into profiling). By making contact prints, I can tweak the printer driver to give me a good rendition of the colors before I print the final copy (or copies).

As has been said on another thread by Tom George, get the print behind glass ASAP, and you're assured of reasonable longevity (even with the output from older printers/papers).

[Jakaleena]

I just now found this thread, thanks to Ed's pointer in another discussion.

I'm one of those who takes dig files to a lab for actual photographs. Mainly, it's because I am a lab rat and I usually run the machines. Even in times when I haven't been doing the printing myself, I've still gone to a lab just because I personally prefer actual photographs to computer prints. It's just my own personal taste in things.

Maybe because I'm actually operating the printers, I've discovered that I get what I think is a better end result that way. I'm currently running a Fuji Frontier, but have also worked on several other types of digital RA4 printers. I have been a little surprised when reading newsgroups that people seem to have trouble getting a good print by going to the lab, especially on the Fuji machines, which I happen to like the best of all of the dig machines I've run so far. Maybe I've been lucky - I couldn't use an ICC profile if it came up and bit me on the nose, so I don't mess with color profiles... I just work in sRGB and keep my monitor calibrated and have never had a problem with any of the machines I've used giving me a good rendition of my work.

Then there's also the fact that as I was going from traditional restoration to digital restoration, I was learning to print my work photographically at the same time I was learning to use Photoshop. I think maybe that caused me to adjust the way I retouched and used the program to suit the machines I was printing on.

I can't get a decent looking print from a computer printer to save my life... About the closest thing to a computer print I've had success on good color with is a Kodak dye sub printer, but I detest glossy prints so that's out as an option for me.

Perhaps ignorance is in fact bliss after all...

[gland]

I've been very happy with my inkjet printer. Most of the stuff I do is for family but I have done a few jobs for real money.

The one time I took anything to a commercial printer turned out to be a color match nightmare. This was a fairly simple business card but the customer wanted certain colors. I think they just didn't want to turn down any work so were willing to accept anything.

[Jabbr]

what type of printers and paper do you reccomend for me to use for business clients photos?

I've recently been asked to restore some photos but I dont want to give them prints that arent going to last very long.

Is the Epson 1280 printer worth buying for business/home use?

[gland]

I use an Epson 1270 with Epson paper. The 1280 is a newer version and more expensive.

I've also used Kodak papers that seem to work OK.

[Trimoon]

I use an Epson 9600 with Epson paper and inks
It creates high-quality prints and has a Lightfastness 140+ years
Been very happy

Steve

[lawrence]

I have been thinking of bringing my PS file to a professional printer.
The Print shop that I would be dealing with, uses a XEROX PHASER 790 for digital images. Has anyone heard of this printer is the quality really much more noticable than a medium to high end inkjet printer?

I have enclosed the website of this printer:
http://www.torontoimageworks.com/custom.html
Please, tell me what you think.

Lawrence

[BigAl]

I can't recall where I read it, but folks were against color laser prints because the color mixing was not as good as inkjets. Here's a link which may help you.

[lawrence]

Excellent link, I have no more questions.

[pstewart]

In general inkjets do print better photos, especially the Epson. But of all the color lasers the Tally is the best by far. The pastor of a church I do a lot of work for just bought one, on my recommendation, and the booklets and brochures we printed, full of photos, came out beautiful!

The advantages of a Tally laser are: the inks are 1) more intense on regular paper (don't absorb), 2) don't run when wet, and 3) you can use a variety of shiny papers which look like brochure/magazine quality and get great results.

Disadvantages: For photos, I'd still go with my Epson inkjet. A problem I found with preparing photos to be printed on the laser is that I had to switch to CMYK, and the fleshtones were hard to match and the blues tended to come out too dark. For pictures of people, I definitely like the color results better on the Epson inkjet.

The machine is much more expensive (thousands, not hundreds) and the ink is about the same. So I'd only get this if you want to do mass printing or brochures/booklets, which in the long run will save you half over commercial printing.

Tip: Be sure to use the "heavy paper" setting for only moderately heavy papers, or try it both ways and compare. The "heavy" setting gave far better results on our medium weight shiny brochure papers.

Phyllis

[DJ Dubovsky]

Excellent review Phyllis. You really laid out the pros and cons of the laser printer.
DJ

[charles]

If I'm printing proof sheets (16 to a page) I print them at home. Photographs for wedding albums or framed portraits are printed on my local labs Fuji Frontier for longevity.
Charles

well. i'll have to tell you you'll get the best results if you print on a lightget printer. though i understand not everyone can go out and buy a $100,000. printer. not to mention your basically making a full profit printing on your epson printers.. which dont do a bad job..

but. i'll have to tell you. we dont print inkjet anymore. it's all lightjet. if you dont know what that is.. it's not really a printer thats laying down any ink. its a printer that runs in a darkroom. and the print is basically exposed the same way a traditional photographic print it made. throught light.. lasers...

and goes through the whole photographic chemical process.

[BigAl]

I brought this one back again in view of an earlier thread of mine. I'm finding I can't actually compete with the labs anymore. A postcard size print from a lab now costs R2.79 (SA money, the rand). 4x6 Epson paper costs me just under R3 per sheet. Then I need to add for the ink and my time...

What's worse, the labs don't actually care what the print looks like (eg A4 from a 40kB jpeg!!!). "You want it madam? Sure we can do it."

They also accept images directly off the most commonly used memory devices.

[platscha@cs.com]

I am very familar with the phaser, we use one at school, it gives absolutely beautiful prints even on regular typing paper BUT the longevity is very poor, I would not ever recommend for professional printing. It does not use ink but an emulsion that is melted onto the paper so you get fab results on any paper but this emulsion somewhat like melted crayon does not last for any period.

The CSI LightJet Digital Enlarger accepts 100 foot long rolls of photographic media in 30 inch, 40 inch and 50 inch widths. The LightJet 430 is capable of imaging a print 50 inches by 120 inches. The paper is fed from the roll into a drum where it is held flat. Three lasers simultaneously expose the paper to red, green and blue light, traveling on a track of compressed air and spinning to cover the 270 degree arc of photographic media. After imaging, the paper is off-loaded and processed in standard RA-4 chemistry. The resulting print is a hybrid – digital, in the sense that the information recorded was transmitted through computers to the enlarger, and traditional because, ultimately, silver covered photographic paper was exposed to light and processed in chemicals.

this is the kind of printing that people should be doing.. as an artist. photographer, digital media artist. i would never try and push off a desktop print as my final output print.

-matt
(scanning/restoration dept.)
http://www.portlandcolor.com

[Jenny Wood]

"...this is the kind of printing that people should be doing..."

I would this kind of machine Matt--if I had the bucks! I currently use a lab for my prints. I have been wrestling with this colour management stuff since realizing a few weeks ago I should have been calibrating my monitor all along. After a heap of reading and questions to the lab I use, I hope to find a reliable ICC profile! My first lot of pictures through this lab was great; the second two lots (over a 4 month period) was different in colour--probably due to my lack of monitor calibration. This Agfa lab uses a a d-lab 2 printer. My idea is to get from them their ICC Adobe colour profile they use on their monitor(s). I will ask this question the next time I get in to their shop. I should view my monitor just like one of theirs in the shop--so the ICC colour profile is the same. Right? Anyone out there in Retouch Pro-Land feel free to comment!

Cheers,

Jenny

[Vikki]

I think you would be better off, calibrating your own monitor, and using their printer profile. (They should provide you with that).
Once you have your profile, set up Photoshop to allow you to use that profile for proofing.
Vikki

you couldn't possibly use their monitor profile. all monitors are different, and you would have to calibrate your monitor on your own. creating your own icc profile. you should do that every so often.. whats that? i dont know. some places do it every month. every other month. every two weeks. im not sure how often your monitor really changes over time, but if it's a huge change every two weeks, you should probably get a new monitor..

i'ld say, like the person before me.. get the labs printer profile. although its still going to be tricky, because its not just about the printers profile. your trying to make it so that what you see on your screen is pretty damn close to the output print. which means the calibration of your monitor is pretty important.

i use an X-RiteColor Monitor Optimizer. this is an actual tool that you physically stick to your monitor screen, and it takes readings, of the color values. through a program, i use monico proof, it gives you step by step instructions... to create your profile..

i wouldn't rely on that adobe gamma thing, you get with your computer.

this is not a perfect world. and color management still has its problems..

[Jenny Wood]

Thanks Vikki and thatmold for further thoughts on this topic.

This particular lab I currently use have not been forthcoming yet with their d-lab 2 printer profile--so I am going to ring Agfa Australia and see if I can get with the actual Agfa technician (who are separate from the lab) that calibrate their machine to give me a printer profile. I did find a monitor/printer profile download on the Agfa site last night but the profile information was in German--which I don't know.

Getting the right information from people is often tricky. Most people at the labs here haven't a clue about colour management--or at least their not letting on. They would rather have people just depositing their photos to be restored with them--not necessarily working with a freelance retoucher. They appear to be threatened when asked questions.

Although I feel reluctant to do more restoration work until I get this profile stuff figured out--I haven't given up as of yet!!

Cheers,

Jenny

"..Most people at the labs here haven't a clue about colour management--or at least their not letting on.."

thats probably it right there. i think, im not sure, but i think it's a pretty new thing for a lot of labs. i know it is with us. we've tried a couple different times to get color management to work out. but it's tough to get everyone on the same level. its a change in the workflow. and it doesn't work with everything..

how do i know..? thats exactly whats going on with me, and where i work.

do the resoration work yourself. dont listen to the labs about that. they overcharge. the labs should do a nice job on the color corrections. tell them exactly what you want. you give them specifics, and they will do it.

asking questions.. im not sure what type of questions your asking, but i can see where they would hesitate to answer things, if your trying to "learn", from them. thats what they have their own business for, because they can do it themselves. they want to make the money.

[Jenny Wood]

Hey ThatMold,

You're right about labs overcharging--and of course they want maximun profit. As for asking questions--I am on a steep learning curve and these lab people know that!

Up to last year in June I had never used any Adobe product (even though I've lusted for years wanting to do Photoshop). I do have a traditional Fine Arts degree (for what its worth) and while this knowledge has come in handy--the Photoshop stuff is still newish. I still have heaps to learn!

Cheers,

Jenny