by SilentEcho219 » Mon May 31, 2010 8:02 pm
johnnylightning wrote:I agree that you don't have to use certain brand paper but i disagree that all printers can print photos on photo paper & they turn out as nice as a printer made for printing photos,plus photo printers come with the software to size the photos properly as well as other cool things to make photo printing better,i personally only use canon photo printers for pictures.
The inks for all models are virtually the same across a company's printer models. It's true though, that most printers dedicated to photos allow you to add a lighter cyan and magenta, which is supposed to give you better looking photos, but in my experience, there really is no difference if you add those two extra inks.
Now a color laser printer that uses toner is definitely not going to look good, especially on glossy. Actually looks worse on glossy paper. But the inkjet printers are going to print identically regardless if it is made for office, home, or specifically for photos, because the inks and underlying printing technology is the same.
The photo printers are marketed towards people who want to print mainly photos, but they work just the same. They usually have a more streamlined interface, more media card slots, and photo editing tools built into the printer. The photo printers are also usually cheaper than the "office" printers, but there is a disadvantage here: for example, I know for a fact that HP prices their ink based on the price of the printer. The higher the price of the printer, the lower the cost of the ink, and vice versa. I was told this directly by the HP representative who came into the store to train me and the other employees. He specifically said that either way -- whether you buy an expensive printer or a cheap one -- they get about the same amount of money out of you in the long run anyway.
But this isn't about which printer she needs to buy. It's about what she already had, and what I was getting at is if she doesn't have a "photo-dedicated" printer, that the quality is going to be pretty much the same anyway, because the inks and technology are the same.
That's true that the photo branded printers usually come with software (another thing they use the sell photo branding). But honestly, most of the things that are on those applications now can be done just as easily in the operating system, built in programs or programs that can be downloaded directly from Microsoft, especially since Windows Vista and 7 with Windows Live Gallery, and the Mac has iPhoto.
[quote="johnnylightning"]I agree that you don't have to use certain brand paper but i disagree that all printers can print photos on photo paper & they turn out as nice as a printer made for printing photos,plus photo printers come with the software to size the photos properly as well as other cool things to make photo printing better,i personally only use canon photo printers for pictures. {up}[/quote]
The inks for all models are virtually the same across a company's printer models. It's true though, that most printers dedicated to photos allow you to add a lighter cyan and magenta, which is supposed to give you better looking photos, but in my experience, there really is no difference if you add those two extra inks.
Now a color laser printer that uses toner is definitely not going to look good, especially on glossy. Actually looks worse on glossy paper. But the inkjet printers are going to print identically regardless if it is made for office, home, or specifically for photos, because the inks and underlying printing technology is the same.
The photo printers are marketed towards people who want to print mainly photos, but they work just the same. They usually have a more streamlined interface, more media card slots, and photo editing tools built into the printer. The photo printers are also usually cheaper than the "office" printers, but there is a disadvantage here: for example, I know for a fact that HP prices their ink based on the price of the printer. The higher the price of the printer, the lower the cost of the ink, and vice versa. I was told this directly by the HP representative who came into the store to train me and the other employees. He specifically said that either way -- whether you buy an expensive printer or a cheap one -- they get about the same amount of money out of you in the long run anyway.
But this isn't about which printer she needs to buy. It's about what she already had, and what I was getting at is if she doesn't have a "photo-dedicated" printer, that the quality is going to be pretty much the same anyway, because the inks and technology are the same.
That's true that the photo branded printers usually come with software (another thing they use the sell photo branding). But honestly, most of the things that are on those applications now can be done just as easily in the operating system, built in programs or programs that can be downloaded directly from Microsoft, especially since Windows Vista and 7 with Windows Live Gallery, and the Mac has iPhoto.