Cost of printing inkjets

[bobbyrab]

Having just viewed the thread about darkroom printing, I was wondering what you all think of the cost of injet prints. I bought an HP photosmart pro B1980 a couple of years ago, which will print up to A3 in size and has large ink cartridges with separate renewable print heads. Now replacing all 8 ink cartridges cost approximately £240 [$380] when I last checked, but I never seem to get a great many prints out of the thing before it's asking for more cartridges, it's difficult to quantify how many prints as the cartridges don't run out at the same time, print sizes differ etc, but at a guess I don't think I get more than about 20 A3's per set of inks.

I suspect this is down to using it infrequently. So every time I start it up, it goes into it's head cleaning mode which I know uses ink.
Bottom line is I haven't replaced the last set of cartridges or used it for about a year now, so almost certainly the heads will need replacing as well which will bring the cost up to who knows what, but too much. It seems to me cheaper just to go to my lab and have a conventional print done. Did I get a dud, or are they just expensive pieces of equipment to run?

 

[KenR]

Gillette

Gillette

It was King Gillette who revolutionized business in the late 1800's with his strategy of "give away the razor and make your money on the blades." This has been applied many times since then, with printers and their cartridges being a recent example of the same philosophy. In contrast, a box of Ilford 11x14 paper for the wet darkroom costs me $85.00 for 50 sheets - with a couple of bucks for chemicals, I never realized what a bargain it is. Another reason to stick with silver gelatin printing.

 

[abo_1970]

The cost of the ink for me was a reason not to get a printer. I had been looking at a decent Epson printer, but the cost of both the printer and the ink scared me off. Also, when thinking about how often I would use it I suspected I would run into a lot of issues with the printheads due to the infrequent use and the ink drying out.
So for that reason I bought a Canon Selphy for the small prints and have the big ones done by the lab.

 

[bobbyrab]

With a printer I can print whenever I want and I get exactly the colors I want. For this "service quality" I'm willing to pay.

I'd say the same about the prints from my lab.

 

[sepiareverb]

I've found that I get a tremendous number of prints - way, way more than I was expecting- out of the Epson 3880. I can't even guess how many prints that thing has spat out over the last year and a half and yet I have only needed to replace two of the cartridges thus far- one about two weeks ago and another the other day. Paper is certainly pricey, but between the ease of getting a print made (even just one here and there), and the pleasure working with color in my RAW workflow I say I'm ahead. I rarely had C-prints or Cibachromes done for me, but even though I printed myself I think any cost difference are a wash. A nice 11x14 or 16x20 print was never cheap.

 

[Rhoyle]

I know that the Epson printers love to be used. If used frequently, they almost never clog. However, if you let them sit, you can run into issues. I had to throw out a couple of Epsons for drying up and not being able to clean. However, I still replaced them with Epsons. Currently a 1400 and it's been going strong for a couple of years.

 

[jbrianfoto]

The best way I learned was to figure out the cost per square inch of ink coverage. I used to have an Epson 4800 running Piezography B/W inks. A new set of inks cost almost $700 (4 years ago). That printer snorted ink like a coke whore. It added up (for me and my redneck math) to something like $18 per 11X17, just in ink! I did not run the printer all the time, so head cleaning consumed alot of ink too. In the end, I got rid of it (at a loss, but I was not sad) - the printer misfed constantly (took 7,8,9, 10 tries to get a single page thru it).

The only worries I have in my wet lab outside of paper costs is, should I not print for an extend period of time, that chemicles may go bad. I'm much happier now.

 

[lynnb]

I had a B9180 (still sits unused) and replaced it with an Epson 3880. Reason: a known issue with ink usage on the B9180; and banding, particularly on bw prints. The research I did while trying to solve the increasingly thirsty ink usage suggested that the problem was with the NEDD sensor, which tells the printer when it's necessary to run a cleaning cycle. By that time I'd bought several carts and two print heads. Rather than pour more good money after bad, I replaced the printer.

When the B9180 printer was working the print results were excellent. My first B9180 started to have problems just within the warranty period and was replaced. The second one started consuming large quantities of ink just after the warranty expired.

I narrowed down my replacement choice to the PIXMA 9500 II or the 3880. On a cost per print basis the 3880 looked significantly cheaper to run (larger carts), and it shipped with full carts rather than starter carts, meaning the printer cost was negligible. Print samples from both were impressive. I'd have been happy with either printer.

I considered using a smaller A4 printer and getting larger ones done by a lab, but the 3880 is cheaper to run than an A4 printer and it does A2. I prefer to have total control over workflow so to me it was a no-brainer.

 

[whitecat]

Lynn, how do you like the 3880? How is the black and white printing? I have the r2400 and it gives me excellent prints in color and black and white but every time I order ink, it's over $100.00.

 

[bobbyrab]

It's partly my own fault, by the time I got around to trying to calibrate the thing properly, then realised it was eating ink at a rate that would signal it had a problem, I was out of warranty. It was supposed to clean the heads in about 10 seconds, mine takes about eight minutes of crashing and whirring, and presumably glugging before it's done, and to add insult to injury i haven't had a print yet that it's not possible to see lines when viewed very closely.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

I 've had an Epson R2400 for the last six years. The color and black and white results from this printer are extremely good. I printed in a darkroom for years and the quality of black and white, as well as the flexibility to clean up or alter files make the digital workflow a no-brainer for me. I make certain to use mine at least once per day running at least a 5x7 color print through it. Yes it occasionally (every2 or 3 weeks) will start a cleaning cycle on it's own, but running at least one small job a day as well as replacing the cartridges shortly after the warning light comes on helps eliminate problems. Having a waste ink reservoir outside the printer also eliminates some issues.

 

[lynnb]

Whitecat, so far I am very pleased with both colour and bw prints from the 3880. Mostly I've used Epson Premium Glossy and some leftover supplies of HP Advanced Photo Paper Glossy. Very good results and no artefacts (like bronzing) with either paper. I haven't yet tried Hahnemuehle Photo Rag 308 or other specialty papers that I have on hand.

I still own an HP 8450 which uses dye inks. The bw prints from it have deeper blacks compared to the pigment prints. Dye printers are also less prone to head clogging, particularly when left idle for long periods. I wanted a larger printer for selling prints - that was my reason for buying the B9180 in the first place. I decided on pigment because the prints are reported to be more resistant to fading.

A set of replacement carts for the 3880 is very expensive as they are large carts, but it's not expensive on a per-print basis compared to smaller printers.

Mr Fizzlesticks - you are right, as long as you can find a lab that does competent work. But there is much satisfaction and learning to be had in producing your own work, whether in a chemical darkroom or using software and an inkjet. It's a long journey to learn colour workflow management from camera to print, but the journey has its rewards. I know considerably more about colour and bw now than I would have learned if I'd just let a lab do it.

However, for family snaps, I still use Snapfish to bulk order postcard-size prints. It's cheaper and the results are more than acceptable. For fine art prints the equation works the other way. The 3880 paid for itself fairly quickly, and the results are excellent. Of course, you may have access to cheaper pro printing services than here in Australia, where everything typically costs 1.5x-2x US prices.

 

[shadowfox]

If you are reading this and are an amateur who is thinking about picking up a printer don't bother unless you are going to use it a lot and often. You will get much better quality from sending your images to someone who knows what they are doing. For 90% of inkjet users the printers are a waste of time and money.

Let me balance the above with this:

If you ever thought about building a portfolio, selling your prints, doing prints for others, etc. Don't be afraid to start by getting a printer (or better yet, setup a darkroom 🙂 ).

Top-dog Inkjet printers are now unreasonably cheap, and the fact is, you will never know what is the demand for your prints or service until you try.

This is the same exact situation as learning how to paint, should I only do it if I'm going to paint often and big? just because I'm afraid of the cost of paint and canvas?