• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cheap photo printing?

E

Edge17

Senior member
So I've got 1000+ digital photos i'd like to print up. I don't typically get photos printed, so I don't really know whats good and what isn't.

Anyone know a good/cheap place to get large numbers of photos printed?
 
Originally posted by: Edge17
any idea what your cost/picture works out to be, print at home...?
Click to expand...

Not sure the exact cost per picture, but I got the Canon PIXMA iP6600D on sale a little while ago, and I got two 50 packs of their 4 x 6 premium paper for about $12.

I think they come out a tad better than lab developed prints personally, and their Pro paper is a heavier weight than the stuff you get at most phot developers...

Oh, BTW...the printer I mentioned is cheap as hell right now on Amazon since it's being phased out for the iP6700D...it's like $105 now.
 
Kodak does $0.15 for 4x6 pictures. If you sign up you get 10 free prints + $1.49 process fee. If anything, use them to see if you like the quality of their prints.
 
I would NOT print them at home. I don't think the quality/durability is as good as a professional print (it may be now, I don't know - but it wasn't before). Costco is good, I think they're like $.17 a print. With that many though I'd wait for a sale at Adoramapix.com.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
I would NOT print them at home. I don't think the quality/durability is as good as a professional print (it may be now, I don't know - but it wasn't before). Costco is good, I think they're like $.17 a print. With that many though I'd wait for a sale at Adoramapix.com.
Click to expand...

That is NOT the case anymore. Canon ink does not smudge when wet, and is rated for 100 years...

ChromaLife100
 
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Originally posted by: mugs
I would NOT print them at home. I don't think the quality/durability is as good as a professional print (it may be now, I don't know - but it wasn't before). Costco is good, I think they're like $.17 a print. With that many though I'd wait for a sale at Adoramapix.com.
Click to expand...

That is NOT the case anymore. Canon ink does not smudge when wet, and is rated for 100 years...

ChromaLife100
Click to expand...

Sure enough. But when you add it all up, printing at home is probably more expensive anyway, not to mention the time required. It's nice and convenient, but for 1000 prints I'd have someone else print them. 🙂
 
Sam's Club is pretty good deal. I think it was like 17 cents per print last time I did large volume. I print at home if it's like 10 prints or so but not large number of prints...not worth the time. Just burn all your pics on a CD and take it there or if you have fast internet upload, you can upload it from home.
 
My local Walmarts can take digital files across the Web, and they do a great job. They use the same Fuji Frontier printers and papers as my more expeneive pro labs, and results are identical.

I have no issues with ink-jet, but it's simply inconvenient for a lot of prints, and you need expensive paper with good ink to be archival.
 
Canon ink does not smudge when wet, and is rated for 100 years...
Click to expand...

Non pigment based ink won't last 100 years, regardless of what Canon is claiming. You also need to match the newer inks with archival paper to last a long time, and the cheap, coated crap you guys are talking about isn't archival.
 
Winkflashfor me. I have done a ton of transactions with them, all of them were perfect except one. And when I pointed out the printing error (a very small white line in calender that I ordered) they quickly sent me another free of charge.

12 cents, 99cents shipping no matter the size of the order. It really is a great deal, and the photo quality is perfect. And on top of that, for me personally they arrive very quickly because they ship from Rhode Island (I live in CT).

Oh, and sometimes they have 50 prints for free for new customers, not sure if the coupon is still around though (worth looking into).


For quick prints at home i use a Canon IP3000 with canon photo paper, it does a really good job. The ink is cheap, the printer is cheap, and it is well designed; I'm very happy with it.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Originally posted by: mugs
I would NOT print them at home. I don't think the quality/durability is as good as a professional print (it may be now, I don't know - but it wasn't before). Costco is good, I think they're like $.17 a print. With that many though I'd wait for a sale at Adoramapix.com.
Click to expand...

That is NOT the case anymore. Canon ink does not smudge when wet, and is rated for 100 years...

ChromaLife100
Click to expand...

Sure enough. But when you add it all up, printing at home is probably more expensive anyway, not to mention the time required. It's nice and convenient, but for 1000 prints I'd have someone else print them. 🙂
Click to expand...

For, 1000+, I'd agree. But there really is not much time required. I can print a 4 x 6 print in about 30-45 seconds. The printer I got now makes it even easier with the screen. You can either rpint from a PC, plug a camera directly into it and review/edit the pictures right on it's LCD (including cropping/red eye fixing), or just pop the memory card out of your camera and into the printer. Also, the printer has 6 seperate ink tanks, that are only about $12-$15 each, so you can replace only one color instead of replacing a "color" tank because you are out of one color.

I'll have to try and figure out my cost per picture sometime...
 
hmm...15 cents is still like 150 bucks. haha i thoughtdigital camera's were supposed to be cheaper....if i'd used a regular camera i probably would never have taken so many pictures to begin with
 
Originally posted by: spike spiegal
Canon ink does not smudge when wet, and is rated for 100 years...
Click to expand...

Non pigment based ink won't last 100 years, regardless of what Canon is claiming. You also need to match the newer inks with archival paper to last a long time, and the cheap, coated crap you guys are talking about isn't archival.
Click to expand...

I'm using Canon's Photo paper pro...it's not the "cheap coated crap". Have you actually done the tests to claim Canon is wrong, or do we just take your word for it?

I think it's likely you'd need near perfect conditions to last the 100 years, but wil lyour average Walmart developed photo last longer?

Also, I don't believe the ChromLife inks are pigment based...one of the reasons the ip6600D only does so so text quality. Have you actually looked into the technology, or are you just such an expert you don't need to?
 
Originally posted by: Edge17
hmm...15 cents is still like 150 bucks. haha i thoughtdigital camera's were supposed to be cheaper....if i'd used a regular camera i probably would never have taken so many pictures to begin with
Click to expand...

Er... yeah. Well you don't have to print all of them. 😉 Digital is cheaper, because aside from not needing to buy film, you can just print your best shots.
 
oh, and if you are going to do a large order from whatever place, make sure you do a few sample ones to make sure it is of good quality. Nothing like having 1000 worthless photos
 
i've never been able to beat out professional printers like dotphoto in bulk. Even dropping to refillable quality ink and non-canon paper... factor in time to calibrate color, and the fact that I kept running into banding problems every so often.. and the bad print where too much ink was still on the heads....

yeah, I just sent my stuff to xpphoto@ 12 cents a print. dotphoto used to have some good bulk deals... alright quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top