Portable Photo printer

[commercial photographer in]

<p>One of the features of my event photography business is photographing guests and handing out a 4x6 photo for the guest to take home a memory of the event. Most of the events where this will be used are smaller and not too many people, I actually thought of the idea for children's birthday parties. What is a good photo printer that doesn't require a computer but will stand up to heavy use?</p>

<p> </p>

[andylynn]

<p>I got my father an Epson model last year that has a screen, takes cards and the media are sold in ink plus paper packages. It works pretty well but of course isn't up to the same specs as an Epson desktop printer. I think it can run on batteries too. The all-in-one packaging would let you know exactly what the per-print costs are. It also has a built in CD burner and does things like 2 wallet prints per page and contact sheets.</p>

<p>I don't know about "heavy use" - I wouldn't try dropping it on concrete.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>You want a Sony UP-CR10L "SnapLab" printer. It produces a dye-sub output, which makes for physical prints that are much longer lived, physically more scratch resistant, and moisture resistant. Inkjet printing on location is SLOW and produces delicate output. It can produce 4x6 and 5x7 prints... the 5x7 media isn't a lot more expensive, but you can easily charge twice the amount to the customer. There's just something a lot more substantial about being handed a 5x7, rather than the more snap-shot-from-the-drug-store feeling 4x6. <br /><br />The <strong><a href="http://www.laurphoto.com/prdr/sony_snaplab">Sony unit</a></strong> is well built, can print via USB cable from a typical workstation, or can be used entirely on its own in kiosk mode. You can tell it display prices, custom splash screens, etc. It's the real thing, without getting into thousands of dollars. I've had very good luck with mine (just cranked out some prints for a customer an hour ago).<br /><br />It's <em>sort</em> of the same thing as the little Selphy-ish units from Canon, but it's built around the notion that you need it to operate in kiosk mode sometimes, and produce really nice output in a hurry. Which it definitely does.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>If you can't afford the Sony, I can recommend the Canon SELPHY dye-sub printers. I've tested a coupl eo fthem and I was pretty pleased with the results. The only problem is that I don't think any of them can print larger than 4x6, but of that's all you nee, then they are fine.</p>

<p>I reviewed a couple of the older models here - <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/cp_510_710_review.html">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/cp_510_710_review.html</a> - I haven't look at any of the newer models, but I can only assume that they are at least as good. The price is right too, the 760 is under $100. Prints cost about 30 cents each.</p>

[t37traveler]

<p>I use an Epson PictureMate for exactly your purpose - print out postcards. You can download directly from your camera, although I never do. It survived 7 months at sea on a sailboat and never skipped a beat. I also like it because you buy 100 sheets of 4x6 paper and one single cartridge that holds all the inks in one package. It is set up to provide 100 prints from one ink/paper kit. I can usually get a few more. Cost of the prints is about 29 cents each. Epson product support has always been excellent. Be sure that these postcards are hand stamped; the automated machines in the postal system will scrape a white spot into the enter as it pulls the card through. I discovered this when I saw what had happened to a bunch I had sent to my father.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>which makes for physical prints that are much longer lived,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Where's the data on this? The Epson PictureMates use pigment inks and I've seen no fading over several years. The inks should last forever, relatively speaking.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>I second Bob's SELPHY suggestion (though not to downplay the Sony or Epson, which I have no experience with). I checked the SELPHY options out when I was at PMA and was fairly impressed. If I were doing a project where it would be useful for me to be able to hand out shots to my subjects on location, I'd absolutely look in that direction.</p>

<p>Actually, now that I think of it, I do have a project coming up where it might be useful to be able to do that....hmmmmm....</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> It produces a dye-sub output, which makes for physical prints that are much longer lived, physically more scratch resistant, and moisture resistant.</p>

<p>Have to strongly disagree with that. Epson claims 200 years on their PictureMate prints. I'll be happy with 100 - don't know if Wilhelm has done any characterization yet. Also, the prints are extremely durable, don't scratch, and appear to be water-resistant on the surface.</p>

<p>If you buy a 270 pack of ink and paper, it works out to about 23 cents a print.</p>

<p>I've had one for a couple years now. Always works, has never clogged. I use it to hand out prints to people I snap on the street.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Right. Not all inket prints are the same, obviously. By "longer" lived, I'm referring more to the dye-sub print's physical robustness when being handled, <em>especially</em> in the hand-em-out mode, where it will probably be tucked in to a paper or card folder, and then dropped into somebody's purse or jacket pocket. Damp fingers from holding a cold drink, or sweating while dancing at an event? <em>Some</em> inkjet prints may indeed have 200-year pigment, but that won't help if it has a nice big wet finger print smudge in the middle of it. That's the print hardiness I'm referring to. And of course, the non-pigment inkjet prints are notoriously short-lived.<br /><br />I guess I'll have to handle some PictureMate output to see what I think. My primary happyness with the Sony unit? Fully cooked 5x7's from a CF card in only 22 seconds, and roll printing for hundreds of images at a go. Not to mention a large looky-touchy display. It's a pretty specific tool.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>Matt's point is usually what people are referring to when they talk about dye-sub prints being tougher. Drop a newly printed dye sub 4x6 in a puddle and then do the same with a new inkjet 4x6 and see what happens. Now, Epson does claim that the ictureMate images "resist water, smudging, and most notably fading". But I would have to test that water and smudging reisitance myself. I haven't met an inkjet thus far that holds up to either right after printing like a dye-sub does.</p>

<p>I will say that Brad's usage is one of the things that a lot of "street" or "documentary" photographers miss the boat on. One can win a lot of friends and help oneself get better images by handing out a few $0.25 4x6's.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> That's the print hardiness I'm referring to. </p>

<p>And that's where PictureMate prints are great - print hardiness and repeated handling. I've tested with water on the surface and they do not smudge; and they don't scuff - they're dye inks, BTW. The back is paper, so no doubt they'd fail the leaving in a puddle test.</p>

<p>>>> And of course, the non-pigment inkjet prints are notoriously short-lived.</p>

<p>I checked and Wilhelm rates Permanence under glass at 96 years; >147 years under UV glass, and >200 years in dark storage. He rates Resistance to Water as "High." Another nice thing is that B&W is dead neutral.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.citysnaps.net/blog/?p=219">Here's a small project</a> I put together using PictureMate prints for someone I've been shooting awhile who was recently married.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>BTW, I'm sure dye-sub prints are similarly great. It's just that all of the conventional wisdom about inkjet prints doesn't necessarily apply across the board.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>I guess I'll have to handle some PictureMate output to see what I think.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would have expected scathing comments to be backed by experience. The one criticism that I know to be true is the speed. However, I have never had any complaints about the PictureMate prints I have handed out.</p>

[joshroot]

<blockquote>

<p>I would have expected scathing comments to be backed by experience.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Look, 99/100 times, inkjet prints are fragile after handling. So this one time Matt should have said "Gosh, I'd better not base my opinion on the other 99 times I've dealt with inkjet prints"? You would have done the same thing in his shoes.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Jeff: I've handled thousands of inkjet prints from Canon, HP, Epson, Lexmark, and the rest - as well as dye-sub from HiTi, Canon, Sony, Kodak, Samsung, Sony and others. My own experience has been that the inkjet prints are, indeed, compartively delicate. That's not a scathing comment, it's just an observation. No, I have not handled prints (that I know of) from the one Epson device mentioned, and am delighted if they've got a way to produce tougher ink prints. If I get bored today, I'll go do a little reading on materials costs, life cycle, print head maintenance, print speed, and all of the other factors that should weigh in when comparing the two technologies.<br /><br />When (at the top of this thread) I mentioned dye-sub for hand-out event/scene prints, I was speaking from personal experience in comparing the two formats. If Epson's PictureMate is a significant departure from the rest of the inkjet fold, then that's great. But a <em>lot</em> of people trying to do some event printing on the cheap make the mistake of thinking that the inkjet printer they're used to using around the house can get them through in the field. As a generalization, that's just not a good idea. The dye-sub printers - even the little inexpensive ones, as Bob mentioned - do a really nice job. It's just important to differentiate between vanilla inkjet printers and something that might be more field worthy.<br /><br />The downside to the Sony unit that I like so well? You sure can't walk into the local Best Buy and procure a couple rolls of paper and dye/laminate cartridges. There's a highly competitive market for having them delivered to you the next day from commercial suppliers, but you need to inventory the materials if you're the spontaneous type. If you're <em>not</em> the spontaneous type, consider that the dye-sub printers, as a class, can be used and then stuck away in a closet for a year... and then pulled back out down the road for immediate use without a single worry about ink-related clogs in print heads.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>With the Epson, it's not as bad as the old dye priters where you need to leave the paper to dry for a day, and the paper is pretty heavy (but I can't remember the rating in pounds). However, it's true that it's not very fast - it's under a minute but I wouldn't wan to run off a couple hundred prints on it - and you'll smudge the ink if you don't let it dry for a minute or two before handling it, and the water resistance doesn't apply until it's dried for a while. I wouldn't call these inkjet prints "fragile" because that's a bit too generalized but they definitely have limitations.</p>

<p>I've spilled a soda on an Epson print on semigloss right before a presentation, dabbed it off with a damp paper towel and dried it, pinned it up and no problem.</p>

<p>One other thing about these - none of these printers are raw processors. If you're going to go laptop-less you need to shoot JPG.</p>

[commercial photographer in]

<p>Thanks for the tips on the printer. I love the Sony and the Canon ones I've seen. Our local country store used the Canon one for "Photos with the Easter Bunny" this year. I've seen the Epson PictureMate in use and that one is impressive as well.<br>

I think I'm leaning toward the Canon only because of the price. I can't seem to afford the 1200 for the Sony one. But I'm still researching, as maybe my business will pick up to the point where I could afford the Sony. That is a impressive unit.<br>

Thanks for the advise.</p>

<p> </p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> and you'll smudge the ink if you don't let it dry for a minute or two before handling it, and the water resistance doesn't apply until it's dried for a while. I wouldn't call these inkjet prints "fragile" because that's a bit too generalized but they definitely have limitations.</p>

<p>Curious Andrew, are you speaking specifically with respect to Epson PictureMate prints? Or dye ink prints in general? <br>

I ask because I've yet to smudge one making hundreds of prints; even handling the surface as they exit the printer. Also, what sort of definite limitations are you speaking of with respect to fragility. Barring gouging with a nail, I'm at a loss to think of any...</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I've smudged prints from a Picturemate on glossy paper by accidentally touching it right out of the printer. I've done the same with my R800. But not often. I've never had that problem with matte prints from the R800 and never tried matte on a Picturemate, so like I said, I don't consider it a very big deal anymore.</p>

<p>I'd thought the Picturemate printer I was using was using pigment inks but it turns out I was wrong. I guess they have archival dye inks. Maybe my anti-dye bias is misplaced.</p>

[aimee_pieters]

<p>I'm also a SONY SnapLab fan and have used them for many events without a glitch. Not only are they MUCH faster than an inkjet printer, but they use a ribbon cartridge, NOT ink, so when the print comes out it's 100% dry because it doesn't use anything wet. <br>

I buy my SONY products and other trinkets that I sell for extra income at events from Ted at Neil Enterprises. I got an email about a sale where you get FREE paper, ribbon, carry bag, etc. I always get my order right away too and their paper/ribbon prices just dropped, so a 4x6 is just a tad under 20 cents per print...-Aimee</p>