Dearer to print at home?

padocon · 17-11-2009 1:16am #1

Decent photography printers are fairly dear, plus the cost of paper and ink. It's a nice connivence to have the photo printed straight away, but how economical is it? Is it possible cost wise to print your own photos while maintaining the same quality as printers else where?

5x7 prints are relatively o.k. but when it comes to larger sizes the price goes up.

So I just wanted to see if you print at home or else where?
And
Does it work out dearer to print at home?

smelltheglove · 17-11-2009 1:29am

It depend on what printer you go for and if you factor the price of the printer into cost.

For example my printer prints up to 24 inches wide on roll formate. I print canvas and 8x10 mainly. I would love a dye sub for the 8 x 10 but budget hasnt allowed as yet.

Fuji centre gives me a 8x10 for 3 or Harveys for 2.50, dye sub would give for anything between say 90c and 1.50 a rough estimate.

Now when I spoke to my supplier once about interest in a dye sub he thought I was mad, he got his little calculator out and did numerous adding and deducting to come up with a price of around 70c per print of 8x10. The printer takes 7 cartridges, but they are roughly 90 each after vat, the upgrade on the market for this printer at the minute, the 7800 i think, is around 3k. I got my 7600 for a ridiculous price of 450 plus a days photography and this included rolls pf paper, a roll of photo paper and a set of cartridges and release of copyright on around 35 images. Not bad me thinks..... So obviously I dont count the cost of the printer into the amount i was given by the supplier but if i was to do that it would be substantially dearer. But having said that it is all about the quality of the print also, whats the point in having a fantastic picture printed on an everday inkjet, I have 4 printers but would only print an image with the 7600.

Dearer to print at home?

Comments