| mdxx3 |
| Does anyone here have some good/bad experiences with any of the latest or recent 4x6 dye sublimation printers? I'm looking to buy a new one for occasional use at home. Picture quality (color/tone and brightness) must be good, prints "fast", cartridges/consumables be easy to find, and with USB interface. Does not need to be portable. Please let me know. Thanks. |
|
|
| jhue |
I'll admit that I haven't really been keeping up, but my impression was that ink jet technology had surpassed dye sublimation a few years ago, at least as far as photographic reproduction goes.
I had experience 10+ years ago with $10k dye sublimation printers and while inkjet could not come anywhere close 10 years ago, dye sub really hasn't improved much, while inkjet has continually improved each year.
This article seems to provide confirmation:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1954659,00.asp
Why do you want a dye-sub printer if inkjet can now produce superior quality? |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
| Well, that article mentioned the very reason why I'm interested in a dye sub printer. The photo comes out laminated and is kind of smudge/water-proof. The dye sub photos probably will look/feel better when giving the photos away to friends, and not like it came out of an inkjet printer. In terms of dpi, an inkjet will be much better but I figure a 300+ or 400+ dpi dye sub printer should be sufficient... (?) Thanks. |
|
|
| jhue |
quote:
Originally posted by mdxx3
The dye sub photos probably will look/feel better when giving the photos away to friends, and not like it came out of an inkjet printer.
You should take a look at the output from one of the latest true photo inkjet printers from Canon or Epson. When you write "not look like it came out of an inkjet printer" it makes me think you've never seen really good inkjet output. The best photo inkjets have produced clearly better quality than dye sub since around 2004. The color gamut, D-max, and spatial resolution of inkjets are much better than dye-subs these days. And the last time I checked, dye-sub inks have weird reflective properties when viewed at an angle - making them look less like traditional prints than inkjet prints.
Take a look at one of the new Epson PictureMates (the Pal, Snap, or Flash model). From the description of the "smudge and water resistant inks" it sounds like they're using the same "Claria" inks as Epson's photo printers. Epson will send you a free output sample, just go to their web site and fill out the form. I strongly recommend you take a look at them before making your decision. |
|
|
| G. COLTON |
I have been using an HP 325 for a couple of years now and certainly would not trade it for older technology. I have never seen a print from the printer that you are referrencing, but I seriously doubt that it would stand up to the quality of the HP325. The prints that I get from this printer compare well on a side by side comparrison to those received from a photo lab.
I cannot speak to the cost difference between the HP325 and the printer you are questioning. I am guessing that the HP325 cost about as much per print as the less expensive comercial mail order prints.
G |
|
|
| nightguy |
| I have a Canon i860 inkjet that's at least 3 years old and you absolutely cannot tell the difference until you flip it over and see Canon printed across the back. The cost is close if not the same as a photo lab. |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
Thanks to everyone for the info and links.
I already have a big Canon Multipass CMYK inkjet printer and the print quality is very nice - I was thinking I don't need another inkjet because I already have one. Now looking for a small photo printer. And really dunno which type now that everyone mentioned different things.
I checked a few manufacturers' websites and each of them claim theirs is very good for whatever reasons (water resist, fade resist for n-years where n are super large numbers, etc). Some must be used with special ink and paper combo only. One combo is even waterproof but they don't list an actual printer with this ink/pigment. Anyways, I'm totally confused... and therefore I'm not buying a photo printer today... maybe in a few days after some thinking.
Funny... no dye sub?? I swear that's the only type of printer that a store here have in their camera/photo dept... made by Canon, HiTi, Kodak, Olympus, Sony, etc. The HP or Epson inkjet type must be in another dept there which I will check again.
Keep the info coming.
Thanks. |
|
|
| TheWorm |
| I bought an Epson Photomate for $100 or so and it's great. Not sure whether it's inkjet or dyesub, but the PQ is outstanding for quick printouts. Not sure about longevity, but it's better than my older HP and Canon multifunctions/photoprinters. |
|
|
| loa3 |
We have a Canon Selphy 510 dye sub and we think it's great. It prints a pic. in less than a minute. The pic looks like it came from a photo processing shop. I carry it in the camera bag and it's always ready to use.
I really like the lamination step -- the pic is permanent when it leaves the printer.
The best part is the price we paid -- $49. |
|
|
| crmsnidol |
quote:
Originally posted by loa3
We have a Canon Selphy 510 dye sub and we think it's great.
I really like the lamination step -- the pic is permanent when it leaves the printer.
The best part is the price we paid -- $49.
How much are the consumables for the printer? i.e. ink, dye, cartridge, etc. Printers these days are sold using the razor/razorblade marketing method. Sell the printer cheap because you'll keep coming back to that brand for the high-than-normal priced inks.
I use a Canon inkjet that has seperate cartridges for eask ink color (CMYK and black) so that I can replace individual colors when they run out. Not sure about the Selphy but printers that use multi-color replacement cartridges end up costing the end-user much more over time because you end up having to throw away an almost full cartridge in some cases just to refill a single color.
Here is an interesting chart about the cost of printer ink.
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/peri...ooze-212444.php |
|
|
| loa3 |
| Consumables for the Canon Selphy 510 are reasonable -- a box containing 108 4X6 sheets of photo paper and enough dye sub. ink to handle all 108 sheets retails for $29.95. That's about 28 cents a pic, and the pics are available right away -- don't have to wait for Shutterfly or Photoworks to mail them. |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
I came back from Best Buy earlier. I wasn't there early enough to get that laptop on sale. They have this HP photo printer on super-sale... The printer, travel case, battery, ink cartridge (there're actually 2 cartridges here), and 100 pcs paper... all for $89 without any mail-in rebate. Of course I bought it:p
(Then I went over to Fry's and bought even more fun stuff.)
Thanks to everyone for your info on the 4x6 printer. |
|
|
| crmsnidol |
| Congrats on your purchase. While I don't have that printer, I do have that play rug. My daughter and I spent many hours playing with Polly Pockets and LEGO's on it. |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
That play rug is worth every penny because of the fun times together with the kid. We bought this rug from Home Depot earlier this year. We normally play those little cars on it. My kid has way too many hot wheels - most came from his cousins that grew older and didn't want them any more.
I printed a few photos on this printer already. The print quality is ok/nice enough. Tomorrow I get to take this printer over a nephew's place for a birthday party. I can print photos while there and they all wouldn't have to hound me for pictures any more! It's almost like having a Polaroid camera. Lets see how fast I'll run out of paper/ink. |
|
|
| crmsnidol |
quote:
Originally posted by mdxx3
I printed a few photos on this printer already. The print quality is ok/nice enough. Tomorrow I get to take this printer over a nephew's place for a birthday party. I can print photos while there and they all wouldn't have to hound me for pictures any more! It's almost like having a Polaroid camera. Lets see how fast I'll run out of paper/ink.
You hit the nail on the head with your usage - inkjet/portable printers don't really save money compared to having prints done online which typically run between .12 and 19 cents a copy. It's the convenience and instant gratification factor they offer and you have a specific need in that area coming up.
My Canon PIXMA Ip3000 is good enough too. I primarily print pictures for my desk at work and shots for my daughter and her friends. It's good enough but I can tell the difference between the prints I do and something from Shutterfly or OFoto. |
|
|
| G. COLTON |
If you get one of the better small, dedicated photo printers, such as the HP 300 series, your prints will be comparable to the online products.
You do have to be careful of what you pay for supplies or your cost will equal or exceed the online costs. There are a number of places to purchase ink and paper that can save you considerable on per print cost.
G |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
I finished the 100 pcs paper already. Printed ~90 at the birthday party and gave all these photos away. Some pictures/photos were from another person's camera. Some pages were wasted for one reason or another. Printed a few more after coming home too. Tomorrow I'll have to look for more paper and ink.
The picture/color quality is very nice. It basically prints exactly what the camera recorded/captured, and this is via the CF card & SD card - I did not use the camera-direct method. Relatives were happy of the outcome. I noticed some pictures were a little reddish - later after arriving home, I figured it has to be the camera's saturation control setting since the same picture looks the same little reddish on the computer/monitor too.
The print brightness is also very good. No complains at all - very happy. When using a local print shop (silver halide process), I normally have to tell them to brighten/lighten all the photos or it'll turn out darker than what it should be. The adaptive lighting algorithm in this printer must be pretty good, or at least it didn't mess up the photos. It can be switched off too which I haven't tried.
The print speed is horrible - they were all making fun of my cheap printer. It's half price and they think it's half speed too!! Maybe it really is. It takes about 100 seconds per 4x6 photo in the best/fine mode. It's about 55 seconds in the normal mode but this mode shouldn't be used - we'll lose some details and is noticeable if we're picky. Anyways I printed all in the best/fine mode for them and decided to try what the normal mode is about at home (conclusion: not going to use this normal mode, and will use the best/fine mode even if it's slower and uses more ink).
At around the 60th photo, there was an "ink low" message on the screen. At around the 75th photo, it basically ran out of ink when the colors/pictures started looking weird. Lucky I had a second ink cartridge handy. ...put it in and it recalibrated the print head (always waste a page/photo while at it), and have it running again. Then reprinted the last three pictures that were not correct due to low ink.
I also had to switch off the printer's red-eye reduction feature while there - it was messing up on the birthday cake. The algorithm must be thinking some words on the cake, written in red, was part of somebody's face/eyes and decide to paint the words gray/black after removing the red component. Also in one picture, somebody's face (sitting at a distance) was totally messed up. The same photos reprinted with this red-eye reduction feature switched off came out perfect. I guess this feature on this HP photo printer will have to stay off. None of the pictures/people I took today have red eyes anyways - because the flash is away from the lens, plus I have this flash pointing to the ceiling (standard old method to bounce the light off the ceiling instead of a direct hit on the face).
Well, looks like some there at that party earlier will be shopping for photo printers soon. They saw how nice the pictures were, how handy it was, or at least didn't see a computer needed to work this printer. Hope they all can find faster 4x6 photo printers. And I don't owe any relatives any pictures this time around:D Next party next month they can bring theirs and we'll print in parallel and get it done quick. |
|
|
|
