# Talk me out of buying a gigantic printer



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

So, I was looking at craigslist, and I noticed that there are some decent looking Epson large format printers for sale nearby for about $900. Looking at comparable desktop sized photo printers, the good ones are around $500.

Maybe I've spent too much time exposed to the stratospheric costs of camera bodies and lenses, but those large format printers do not seem like they're that much more money used than small desktop models. Is there a downside to the large format machines that I'm not seeing, aside from obviously the fact that they're huge and very heavy compared to more normal printers? Is the operating cost a lot higher than a consumer-level printer?


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 16, 2017)

DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, BUY A SECONDHAND WIDE FORMAT EPSON PRINTER!

I have personally taken two 7900's to the dump and just yesterday took my 4900 to the dump. I owned the 4900 from new and it had less than 1500 prints on it, my 7900 had less than 400 prints on it and it was irreparable. I am looking at a friends 7900 next week that looks to have terminal head issues. You cannot buy the parts to repair the printers as Epson will not sell them and keeping the heads running is practically impossible.

First question would be how big do you want to print? If you are happy at 17" then look at the Canon and Epson 'desktop 17" models. They are competitive and often have deals on them, and you get a warranty.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 16, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, BUY A SECONDHAND WIDE FORMAT EPSON PRINTER!
> 
> I have personally taken two 7900's to the dump and just yesterday took my 4900 to the dump. I owned the 4900 from new and it had less than 1500 prints on it, my 7900 had less than 400 prints on it and it was irreparable. I am looking at a friends 7900 next week that looks to have terminal head issues. You cannot buy the parts to repair the printers as Epson will not sell them and keeping the heads running is practically impossible.
> 
> First question would be how big do you want to print? If you are happy at 17" then look at the Canon and Epson 'desktop 17" models. They are competitive and often have deals on them, and you get a warranty.


+1
They like to have a lot of prints run through them in the first two years and then scrapped for the next model.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

They don't sell parts for them!?  What the hell? These are like $3500 machines when new. It would be like Canon not offering repairs on a 5D.

Ok, well maybe I just stick to smaller printers then. Thank you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 16, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> They don't sell parts for them!?  What the hell? These are like $3500 machines when new. It would be like Canon not offering repairs on a 5D.
> 
> Ok, well maybe I just stick to smaller printers then. Thank you.



Well they won't sell parts to the public, my friend got a quote for his 7900 from Epson, they said it will be $2,800 for them to come and put a head in it, it is 18 months old, he can buy a new Canon 24" printer for $2,200.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2017)

I bought a used Epson 7600 printer for $150 and love it. It even works on windows 10 64 bit, and third party inks for it are cheap. I only use it once every two or more months, but the nozzles are clean and ready to go when I fire it up. Its not the latest thing, but it uses pigmented inks. I have a Epson 3880 that I use for smaller prints.

As noted, stay away from the 7900's. 

Be sure to have 4 people to help carry it, and a lot of space to set it up.


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2017)

Just support your local lab


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 16, 2017)

slclick said:


> Just support your local lab



The only feeling better than watching a 36" print come out of the printer, is watching a big wet print develop in a tray!

You'll never save money with a big printer, but doing it yourself is another aspect of photography some people enjoy.


----------



## pwp (Feb 16, 2017)

slclick said:


> Just support your local lab



This....

-pw


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2017)

I buy Cone inks for my 3880 from inkjet mall and had previously noted their article about 7900 head clogs. You can buy and install 3rd party dampers, but buying a used 4900/7900 is throwing away money. You should not accept a free one either, let someone else pay to send it to landfill.

http://www.inkjetmall.com/tech/content.php?135-Epson-4900-7900-9900-user-woes


----------



## unfocused (Feb 16, 2017)

pwp said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Just support your local lab
> ...



Agreed. There is zero economic benefit to printing yourself. My "local" lab happens to be MPix, and I can buy prints from them that are of excellent quality for less than doing it myself. Private's point is valid, in that if you really enjoy printing yourself, go ahead. But just understand that you will never save any money going that route.


----------



## greger (Feb 16, 2017)

So far no one has posted a horror story about owning a large format printer other than warning you about Epson Printers. If you need large prints of your pictures then this will be a fun way of expanding your photography experience. Good luck!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2017)

greger said:


> So far no one has posted a horror story about owning a large format printer. If you need large prints of your pictures then this will be a fun way of expanding your photography experience. Good luck!



I had a 44 inch Epson that was given to me. Buying a set of $200 each ink cartridges was definitely a horror story, I could have spent $1400 on ink and found it did not work. I was lucky to find someone who would haul it away.


----------



## keithcooper (Feb 16, 2017)

*So, you want a large format printer...*

After all the big printer reviews I do, this is something I get asked a lot 

So often, I wrote this, which might be of interest? 

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/so-you-want-a-large-format-printer/

Personally, I'd not buy a second hand LFP (any make), without considerable experience of actually using it for prints.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

Thank you all for the insights. They have been really helpful. I think the right call is definitely not to buy a large format printer right now.

For the people that are calling for me to support local businesses, I have, and I just haven't really been happy with the quality of prints that I've gotten from my local photo lab. And "local" in this case means about 30min away, so that is a hassle in and of itself.

At first it turns out that they were "correcting" the colors in the files that I sent them. I talked to them about that and said that the prints just looked washed out to me, and that I didn't want them to do any tweaking on their own, just print, and the quality I got from them was a little better after that. But I'm still not happy with it. They use a chemical printing process for everything up to 13x18", and I'm just not happy with the colors it puts out.

I'm sure I could send in my files with special instructions to run everything off of their inkjet, but you know that any deviation from the way they normally do things will get overlooked half the time, and they will still just run it off of their chemical printer, and I do not want to be the guy who is extremely picky and rejecting prints that I order from them.

The solution may be a nice desktop printer for myself, and let them handle any big stuff. The Canon Pixma 10 looks nice. I hear the Pixma 1 drinks a ton of ink.


----------



## LDS (Feb 16, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> The solution may be a nice desktop printer for myself, and let them handle any big stuff. The Canon Pixma 10 looks nice. I hear the Pixma 1 drinks a ton of ink.



Read Keith Cooper's reviews of both - it will help to decide. Both have some quirks - i.e. the min border for fine art papers, and max paper length.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

I did not see a mention in the Pixma 1 review of excessive ink use, but many Amazon reviews beg to differ. But, he obviously put about fifty times more effort into the reviews than someone on Amazon. Hmmmmm...


----------



## crazydogrun (Feb 16, 2017)

I love my P9000, and it creates fantastic prints. 

That said, a large format printer is not for the faint hearted. The cost of inks and paper is insane if you are not covering them with sales. And you will need to print every day or you will need to set up a script that prints something every day while you are gone. If you need small prints, then you might need a second smaller printer because some of the large-format printers cannot handle papers smaller than ~8 inches wide. Because of the way cut sheets are held in place by the vacuum, some large format printers like the P7000 and P9000 cannot center an image on cut sheets unless the border is quite large (for example, you cannot center a 12 by 18 image on a fine art 13 by 19 cut sheet). I would never buy a used large format printer unless I had spent a day with it myself, tested the quality, printed multiple nozzle checks, etc. 

On the other hand, if you have the money or know that you can cover your costs, the large prints are wonderfully fun. It's a quick (albeit expensive) way to see the flaws in your prints which can help "up your game." And if you do professional level work, the control over the output is all the reason that you will need. I get the print that I want looking exactly as I need it to look without driving an hour to the closest decent lab that still won't get the colors right or use the fine art paper that I need.


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2017)

I have a graphics artist friend who has owned no less than 6 LFP's. Both Epson and Canon and her advice is.....Support your local lab. I know it's crazy but....


----------



## mnclayshooter (Feb 16, 2017)

We have several LFP's in our offices (architecture/engineering with marketing and graphic production). HP's, Canon, Epson Kip and Oce (Kip and Oce are toner-based not for photogrpahy). 

There's some truths and some myths out there. 

Premium papers/canvas etc cost a LOT in roll stock and you will scrap quite a bit of it in the process of maintaining your printer. It only takes one slightly dirty hand that touched something inside the machine (all that dried ink etc is worse that easter-egg food coloring) that you accidently touch a printing surface that you don't want to touch or accidentally drop a roll and mar the entire roll edge to have to throw away 36" or 42" wide sections of paper. Imagine you accidentally smudge the roll when loading it, advancing and cutting off what could be 2-3 feet of roll stock is literally throwing money away - you can salvage some of it and cut it and use it in a desktop printer, or feed it as sheet stock into the LFP, but that's a lot of work to get exactly the right sheet cut to size etc. 

Ink cartridges, print heads, maintenance cartridges/purging trays etc have to be regularly maintained. Our plotters automatically purge the print heads on a regular basis to keep them flowing correctly as I believe most modern LFP's/inkjet desktop printers will do. The maintenance cartridge that the dumped ink goes into turns into a colorful crystalized mess if not regularly watched as it is like your desktop printer on steroids. Ink costs a LOT and expires on the shelf if you buy in too much bulk. Most of the expiration is simply a warranty lapsing but the firmware of the printer may balk at using an expired cartridge. Knowing the bypass and workarounds for that can save you a lot of money. 

They take up a TON of space - imagine having a compact car parked in your office, that's how big some are with the sorting tray etc attached. 

They are fussy at times, and not for the faint of heart to strip down and find a finger-nail sized sliver of paper that gets caught in the mechanism somewhere, or in the cutting head. Those little shreds wreak havoc on the print head and on the optical alignment sensors etc, not to mention cause misfeeds upon misfeeds and they get saturated with loose/spare ink and then drag beautiful streaks across your prints on occasion. 


I'd suggest, like others have said. If you really have a yearning to print a LOT, get one under warranty and with a service agreement by a local authorized service center. Otherwise, print at a lab. They will have the color calibration all done, will know the papers they use in detail, they pay for mis-prints, ink head issues, dog-ear corners/edges or screw-ups on their end, you just get the pretty print at the end of the day. It is fun to be able to process yourself and watch it come out... It's nerve-wracking when it starts getting sideways on you, and that can happen in a hurry and run up a bill of epic proportions.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 16, 2017)

Get the printer. You will never forgive yourself if you pass it up.


----------



## cayenne (Feb 16, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Just support your local lab
> ...



**DROOL**


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> Get the printer. You will never forgive yourself is you pass it up.


No, I would have never forgiven myself if I passed up on that 50mm 1.0 that I found for (comparatively) a steal. A large format printer just sounds like a headache unless you get a good one brand new, use it often, use it carefully, and are pumping out enough volume to make it make sense. I would be doing very few of those things.

I found a good deal on a Pixma 1, and I think I'll be happy with it. Hopefully the ink usage is not too severe.


----------



## rfdesigner (Feb 16, 2017)

We have a dead EPSON small format (A4) printer needing a trip to the dump due to clogging. I get the impression canon printers clog much much less.

I will replace it with a laserjet B&W printer for home form printing.

For everything else I currently use an online printing service.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 16, 2017)

Sorry to hijack the thread, but it should be brief. 

Does anyone have experience with the top of the line Canon Pixmas, like the Pro 1. A few years back I got one on a bundle deal from Adorama with the 5D III. I didn't keep it. (Sold it on eBay after getting the rebate.)

But I have wondered if anyone kept theirs and what they thought of it. NOTE: I am not talking about the 100 or the 10, but the top end model.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 16, 2017)

The review that's on the website posted on the last page seems pretty thorough. The only omission seems to be that he didn't use it long enough to make a really good determination regarding ink usage rates.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/printer-review-canon-pixma-pro-1/


----------



## keithcooper (Feb 16, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> The review that's on the website posted on the last page seems pretty thorough. The only omission seems to be that he didn't use it long enough to make a really good determination regarding ink usage rates.
> 
> http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/printer-review-canon-pixma-pro-1/


Thanks ... Unfortunately, I usually have to give the printers back 

Given the sorts of testing I do though, any ink use figures could well be somewhat meaningless - with the PRO-1000 and PRO-2000 reviews, I downloaded print ink usage data from the printers, but this function is not available with the older PRO-1 (which like the pro-10 and 100 are starting to show their age - updates later this year?)

BTW I'm hoping to have an Epson P5000 here in a couple of months, to add to the reviews.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 24, 2017)

Well, the open box deal I got on a Pro-1 ended up not coming with ink, which made it ultimately not a very good deal, so I sent it back.

Ultimately, I went for the Pro-1000. Frankly, I don't think I ever would have been truly happy with the 13" maximum width on the Pro-1. I usually like to print things at 16x24. And as decent as the Pro-1 seemed to be, all of the reviews on the Pro-1000 have been nearly flawless.

I printed my first thing on the printer last night, a borderless 17x22. I'm really, really happy with the result. The print matches what I saw on my screen very well.

Does anyone know if the "high" quality print setting uses more ink than normal, or is it just slower? I'm assuming it uses more ink, but I don't see that specifically called out anywhere.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 27, 2017)

Why is large photo paper only available in such weird sizes? I'd like to do some 16x24 prints, but the closest paper I can find is 17x25, therefore requiring me to also go spend $150 on a paper trimmer that will handle a 25" sheet of paper, and run the risk of screwing up the cut and ruining a print. Is there no better way? 13x19 is a little more standard, but not quite as large as I'd like.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 27, 2017)

That is the main difference between the Pro-1000 and the Epson P5000/4900 the ability to handle roll paper, even the P800 has an optional roll paper holder. 

There are several roll papers available in 16" width which gives you the option for your 16" x 24" with zero cutting or waste. Some people do buy 16" roll paper and cut their own 16" x 24" sheets then load them, I highly recommend Epson Premium Lustre on 16" roll even in the Canon printers.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 27, 2017)

The 16" roll idea and then trimming it into 24" sheets isn't too bad. Unfortunately it sounds like all the hassle of dealing with paper that comes rolled with none of the benefits. :

I don't understand why the paper sizes sold in sheets don't seem to adhere to any normal size or aspect ratio for photos. Must be some paper industry standards thing.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 27, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Must be some paper industry standards thing.



Yep.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size

Blame ANSI C / Ledger!


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 28, 2017)

Thank you, I will. 

I had seen those standard sizes before, but I didn't realize what they were based on. Clearly not 35mm photos.


----------



## Valvebounce (Feb 28, 2017)

Hi PBD. 
Thanks, I now know far more about paper sizes than I wanted to! :
Quite interesting on some level. 

Cheers, Graham. 



privatebydesign said:


> Kit Lens Jockey said:
> 
> 
> > Must be some paper industry standards thing.
> ...


----------



## LDS (Feb 28, 2017)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I can find is 17x25, therefore requiring me to also go spend $150 on a paper trimmer that will handle a 25" sheet of paper.



Actually, that what happens in most of the press printing industry. They often don't print at the final product size. They usually print on paper larger than the final size, and then trim to it (book and magazines are rarely in a Ax or "letter" size).

The "wasted" space allows for registration marks (especially for CYMK processes or the like) and other required control information and/or binding, etc., while avoiding the issues of printing "borderless". That's why they are OK with the standard paper sizes.

Photo printing is of course another matter - some supplier may deliver custom paper sizes (they cut the paper themselves from larger sizes), otherwise a good paper trimmer is often one of the best friends of a photo printer


----------



## Halfrack (Mar 8, 2017)

Find a company local to you with a large printer and make a friend. I'm not kidding, understanding what goes into a print will help you a lot, and their use of the printer for non-photo things is critical - dried heads suck, and ROI matters. The reason printing costs a lot is that there is an actual art to it - and a cost when 'ish goes wrong, or your colors aren't what you see on screen.

Also https://www.drycreekphoto.com/ may have ICC profiles for some of your local shops.


----------



## RGF (Mar 11, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Just support your local lab
> ...



I recently purchased a Canon Pro-2000 (24") and so far I am very pleased with it. Cost was around USD $2000 after rebates and discounts.


----------

