Printer reccomendations?

[finescalerr]

So both you and Marc have had bad experiences with Epson. Yet it is the preferred printer for a majority of pro photographers. That reminds me of a little story my brother in law told me about cars:

He bought a Mercedes. Consumer Reports rated it near the bottom of the heap yet he never experienced a problem with it. Another car he owned (I forget which) got a great rating from Consumer Reports and he had nothing but trouble with it. As he pointed out, you never know what you're going to get when you buy something.

At the pro level, I have read rave reviews of both Canon and Hewlett Packard photo printers. Neither review suggested the equivalent Epson was better or worse, merely more of an industry standard.

Bottom line: Buy what you like best and what best seems to suit your needs. Reviews and advice, including my own, may have no bearing on your experience.

Russ

[78ths]

The other factor that has been overlooked is please don't buy a printer that does everything and expect it to be good at anything. "Jack of all trades master of none" sydrome. To put it in perspective the best I can and in simple terms:

A printer is a digital darkroom and 15 years ago a darkroom would have cost you at least 500$ probably 1200$ (3k for pro version) plus night school to learn how to use the basics. Yet consumers pay under 150$ for a printer don't take any classes on image management or color theory and expect perfection. Computers cannot think (in my opinion one of the daftest machines built) they can only calculate. A computer does not know a red pixel from a blue pixel only 10110001110010100.  What you put in you get back out. 

And as Russ said the pro or prosumer versions of any of the companies will be great printers. Personally I don't know any photographers who don't have Epsons in the studio.  They are the Beseler of the printers.

[DaKra]

Regarding the Epson, I liked the waterproof ink mentioned by Darryl.   I have an HP that works fine for my occasional needs, but the Epson's waterproof ink is worth something to me.  So I checked out the Epsons on Amazon, many people with problems and complaints.   Generally high ratings but there seem to be a lot of lemons in circulation.  The reviews left me cold.   

I'd say this is a case where its a good idea to buy from a store like Staples that offers an extended warranty and pay a few bucks more.     

Dave

[clevermod01]

Epson recently un retired the C88+. It is a cheap workhorse. I have had about 10 of them and I just bought another one. Simple reliable and a great image also great ink.

[Chuck Doan]

I had an Epson CX5400 that did well for over 5 years. When it got to the end of its life it just shut down even though it was still printing fine.

I got an Epson NX420-they rope you in by saying the ink is cheaper-but that's because the cartridges are smaller! So far it is OK, but the ink consumption seems greater than the 5400. Get one with a scanner, they are very useful.

[W.P. Rayner]

I have had about 10 of them and I just bought another one. Simple reliable and a great image also great ink.

I've had both Epson and HP printers and I too have always been happier with the image quality from the Epson machines. I don't print many images anymore, so am now just running an inexpensive HP machine which suits our document needs just fine. The scanner function is actually very good given the modest cost of the machine, far better than the first scanner I purchased for around $500 about 15 years ago.

So now I'll ask the obvious question - If the C88+ is such a reliable machine, why have you had to purchase 10 of them?   

Paul

[clevermod01]

Running Clever models in the early days (the first 3 years) we actually sold printed kits and peel and stick texture sheets. We had multiple printers going and were printing thousands of sheets of card stock. At one point we purchased a high output laser printer like you would find in a Kinko's that was 10 times faster but ended up going back to the cheep Epsons. They were slow but bullet proof. We stopped printing in favor of selling digital files on DVD about 4 years ago. I still do a lot of printing of test kits and occasionally will print products for a few select customers.

Thom

[chester]

I keep hearing references to those owning several of a certain type of printer. I don't know if this a positive testament for that kind of printer. I have one of the inexpensive HP printers like Dave and quite frankly have gone through several computers with the same printer. Talk about durability. I get terrific definition in printed word as well as 1/87 scale decal work. Frankly I think it's more important to note that a good vector based software program is as important when doing decal work.
   All that being said, I do wish I had a laser printer since I understand one can do dry transfers on them. Waterproof inks? I coat all decals with a clear finish anyway, moot point.

[eTraxx]

My 'standard' printer is a Brother HL-2140 Laser. Think it was about $125 at Office Depot. 98% of my printing is just .. printing .. nothing fancy so b&w laser works fine. I picked up a HP Deskjet at Walmart just for the scanner for around $50. What amazed me was that the photo printing is excellent too. Sweet.

[W.P. Rayner]

Well that makes perfect sense then Thom. I figured there was likely a commercial production reason for it...

Paul

[clevermod01]

Well, it started as, they were cheap and we were broke but it worked out OK.