A laser for photos

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jack Gillis
  • Start date Start date
J

Jack Gillis

I have Googled this group and found a lot of information but most of it
dates back several years. So, I guess I am seeking current info.

I need to replace my ancient laser and have just gotten a digital
camera. I really don't want to by two printers for several reasons and
was thinking of getting a color laser to handle my normal day to day
printing and once and a while photo printing close to the normal local
pharmacy quality. I am not a serious photographer. Color lasers,
today, are much cheaper than the last time I looked.

Can I expect one of the low end color lasers to do the photo printing at
that level?

Thank you.
 
Jack said:
I have Googled this group and found a lot of information but most of
it dates back several years. So, I guess I am seeking current info.

I need to replace my ancient laser and have just gotten a digital
camera. I really don't want to by two printers for several reasons
and was thinking of getting a color laser to handle my normal day to
day printing and once and a while photo printing close to the normal
local pharmacy quality. I am not a serious photographer. Color
lasers, today, are much cheaper than the last time I looked.

Can I expect one of the low end color lasers to do the photo printing
at that level?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Blunt answer? No, you can't. You will not get lab-quality prints from a £500
colour laser. Nor can you use photo paper in a laser. Buy a cheap mono
laser for text and a decent-quality inkjet for photos. Only way, IMNSHO.
 
Jack Gillis said:
I have Googled this group and found a lot of information but most of it
dates back several years. So, I guess I am seeking current info.

I need to replace my ancient laser and have just gotten a digital camera.
I really don't want to by two printers for several reasons and was
thinking of getting a color laser to handle my normal day to day printing
and once and a while photo printing close to the normal local pharmacy
quality. I am not a serious photographer. Color lasers, today, are much
cheaper than the last time I looked.

Can I expect one of the low end color lasers to do the photo printing at
that level?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

No. You can get a inkjet that produces prints to lab quality (though not
longevity) very inexpensively though.
 
Miss Perspicacia Tick said:
Blunt answer? No, you can't. You will not get lab-quality prints from
a £500 colour laser. Nor can you use photo paper in a laser. Buy a
cheap mono laser for text and a decent-quality inkjet for photos. Only
way, IMNSHO.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

Can you tell me why photo paper can't be used in a laser. Is it too
thick or something like that?

Thanks again
 
There IS photo paper for laser printers.It is glossy,but not as glossy as
inkjet photo paper.As for photo printing with a color laser,it depends on
the laser,and the expectations of the user.For some uses the laser is
better.If you are not interested in archival printing ,or just need a decent
quality photo for a poster,the newer lasers are a good bet.I have made
posters with my lasers and after laminating have hung them outside in direct
sun for 6 months.Inkjet prints might last 1 week.For what it is worth
though,I do not use a low dollar laser printer!
Jack Gillis said:
Miss Perspicacia Tick said:
Blunt answer? No, you can't. You will not get lab-quality prints from a
£500 colour laser. Nor can you use photo paper in a laser. Buy a cheap
mono laser for text and a decent-quality inkjet for photos. Only way,
IMNSHO.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

Can you tell me why photo paper can't be used in a laser. Is it too thick
or something like that?

Thanks again
Click to expand...
 
Jack Gillis wrote on 28/03/2005 15:01:
snipped..
I really don't want to by two printers for several reasons and
was thinking of getting a color laser to handle my normal day to day
printing and once and a while photo printing close to the normal local
pharmacy quality. I am not a serious photographer. Color lasers,
today, are much cheaper than the last time I looked.

Can I expect one of the low end color lasers to do the photo printing at
that level?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Jack,

I bought an Epson Acculaser C900 recently for the same reason as you -
i.e mainly office colour printing plus occasional photos. I accept that
inkjets will get you close to pharmacy quality. But the arguments for
the laser are (in my opinion):

- No more blocked jets / expensive and short lived inkjet carts. Epson
support told me that a cart will only last 6 months even if you don't
use the printer!
- Lower costs per page
- If you use good quality laser paper (e.g. http://tinyurl.com/4h46o)
you WILL get good results. Whether you think they're close enough to
your aspirations is hard to say - best to try to get some print samples.
- Possibly a smaller desktop footprint, although colour lasers are quite
LARGE!

Also, Epson, for some bizarre reason, are doing a deal (in the UK) where
they give a free inkjet with every colour laser, so you can have the
best of both worlds! See http://www.theprinterdatabase.com/ for example.

I got the free inkjet offer and am currently trying to sell it. Am v
pleased with the Acculaser.

HTH!

Pete
 
Probably so.

Peter said:
Jack Gillis wrote on 28/03/2005 15:01:
snipped..


Jack,

I bought an Epson Acculaser C900 recently for the same reason as you -
i.e mainly office colour printing plus occasional photos. I accept
that inkjets will get you close to pharmacy quality. But the
arguments for the laser are (in my opinion):

- No more blocked jets / expensive and short lived inkjet carts.
Epson support told me that a cart will only last 6 months even if you
don't use the printer!
- Lower costs per page
- If you use good quality laser paper (e.g. http://tinyurl.com/4h46o)
you WILL get good results. Whether you think they're close enough to
your aspirations is hard to say - best to try to get some print samples.
- Possibly a smaller desktop footprint, although colour lasers are
quite LARGE!

Also, Epson, for some bizarre reason, are doing a deal (in the UK)
where they give a free inkjet with every colour laser, so you can have
the best of both worlds! See http://www.theprinterdatabase.com/ for
example.

I got the free inkjet offer and am currently trying to sell it. Am v
pleased with the Acculaser.

HTH!

Pete
Click to expand...
 
No. You can get a inkjet that produces prints to lab quality (though not
longevity) very inexpensively though.
Click to expand...

Actually HP and Epson offer inexpensive inkjet printing whose lightfade (>100
years) exceed normal photo prints (~ 22 years). See
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/.

Regards,
Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
 
Peter Boulton said:
I bought an Epson Acculaser C900 recently for the same reason as you -
i.e mainly office colour printing plus occasional photos. I accept that
inkjets will get you close to pharmacy quality. But the arguments for
the laser are (in my opinion):

- No more blocked jets / expensive and short lived inkjet carts. Epson
support told me that a cart will only last 6 months even if you don't
use the printer!
Click to expand...

That's why I wouldn't have an inkjet.
- Lower costs per page
- If you use good quality laser paper (e.g. http://tinyurl.com/4h46o)
you WILL get good results. Whether you think they're close enough to
your aspirations is hard to say - best to try to get some print samples.
- Possibly a smaller desktop footprint, although colour lasers are quite
LARGE!
Click to expand...
Are there any downsides to the colour laser?
 
Bob Headrick said:
Actually HP and Epson offer inexpensive inkjet printing whose lightfade
(>100 years) exceed normal photo prints (~ 22 years). See
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/.

Regards,
Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
Click to expand...
I guess it depends what you call inexpensive - the really cheap Epsons
(don't know about HP) use dye based inks.
 
thoss wrote on 29/03/2005 10:14:
That's why I wouldn't have an inkjet.



Are there any downsides to the colour laser?
Click to expand...

Personally, I can't really see any, other than as discussed in this
thread - i.e. very nice photo output on the right paper, but not quite
up to some inkjets.

Printer is obviously dearer, but has now reached the affordable level in
my book (~£200 ish).

Consumables are shockingly expensive, but last a long time. (Complete
set of replacement toner carts=more than the cost of the printer, which
comes with third full carts). But cost per page still lower.

Weight and footprint. You really need 2 people to shift it, unless you
are very strong and have an iron back. (30+ kgs) And a solid table or
whatever to put it on.

Some colour lasers are sold with quite low memory. I upgraded to the
max 144Mb for my printer as it's relatively cheap (£45?) to do so.

By the time I've flogged off the free printer that came with the Epsson
deal, my old Laserjet 4L and the Epson Crapjet which it replaces the
cost to me will be below £200 and the money well spent!

My only regret is that I've replaced one Epson with another. Based on
my experiences with their inkjet (bad - blocked jets / throwaway carts
due to irregular usage) they really didn't deserve my business. But the
reviews were very good and I got samples versus the equivalent Samsung
CLP500 and decided the Epson print quality was a bit better.

HTH!
 
I've heard that the new Epson AcuLaser C1100 is very good for photos,
which is what I need a laser for too, but I've so far found it
impossible to get hold of any print samples to confirm. If it's as
good as the reviews say, I want one.

There's another printer I read good things about, the Kyocera Mita
FS-C5016N, which is being replaced by the FS-C5020N next month. It
costs about £1,200, but the only consumables are the toners, which
cost £65 each and last for 8,000 pages. It's certainly much cheaper
to operate than other lasers and the reviews say it handles photos
flawlessly, but that price tag is pretty hefty for a home printer.
 
Peter Boulton said:
thoss wrote on 29/03/2005 10:14:

Personally, I can't really see any, other than as discussed in this
thread - i.e. very nice photo output on the right paper, but not quite
up to some inkjets.

Printer is obviously dearer, but has now reached the affordable level in
my book (~£200 ish).

Consumables are shockingly expensive, but last a long time. (Complete
set of replacement toner carts=more than the cost of the printer, which
comes with third full carts). But cost per page still lower.

Weight and footprint. You really need 2 people to shift it, unless you
are very strong and have an iron back. (30+ kgs) And a solid table or
whatever to put it on.

Some colour lasers are sold with quite low memory. I upgraded to the
max 144Mb for my printer as it's relatively cheap (£45?) to do so.

By the time I've flogged off the free printer that came with the Epsson
deal, my old Laserjet 4L and the Epson Crapjet which it replaces the
cost to me will be below £200 and the money well spent!

My only regret is that I've replaced one Epson with another. Based on
my experiences with their inkjet (bad - blocked jets / throwaway carts
due to irregular usage) they really didn't deserve my business. But the
reviews were very good and I got samples versus the equivalent Samsung
CLP500 and decided the Epson print quality was a bit better.

HTH!
Click to expand...
Yes indeed. Thanks.
 
Epson offers several pigment colorant ink printers at their very lowest
price point, but they are 4 color rather than 6 or 7 or 8. These use
Durabrite inks, and they are the C and CX series printers.

In years gone by, the lowest end C printers used dye inks, while the
more costly (still very inexpensive) used pigment ink. In the current C
models, both (the 66 and 86) use pigment (Durabrite) inks.

Although these printers are sold as "office" models, the quality of the
photo images, while not quite a fine as the 6 color dye models, is
nothing to poke a stick at. These printers sell for as little as under
$100 US.

The inks are more costly, however.

Art
 
Douglas said:
There IS photo paper for laser printers.It is glossy,but not as
glossy as inkjet photo paper.As for photo printing with a color
laser,it depends on the laser,and the expectations of the user.For
some uses the laser is better.If you are not interested in archival
printing ,or just need a decent quality photo for a poster,the newer
lasers are a good bet.I have made posters with my lasers and after
laminating have hung them outside in direct sun for 6 months.Inkjet
prints might last 1 week.For what it is worth though,I do not use a
low dollar laser printer!
Click to expand...

Actually, I should have known that because my grandfather keeps giving me
laser printed (or colour photocopied) prints to scan, and they don't.
They're done at his local Kall Kwik (UK commercial printers) and they're
rubbish, TBH. They don't reproduce. He's given me them to scan and reproduce
for various projects and they just don't work.
 
Most color laser printer output is VERY archival. The toners use
pigments and thermal plastic so the colorant is embedded in melted
plastic when it is processed through the printer. That makes for a very
fade-resistant color.

Art
 
Back
Top