When was the last time you "casually" printed?

[RaymondC]

<p>What I mean by this is, not for your customers if you are a pro, not when Christmas and you give a print for someone, not when you wanna print something cos you went out alone with your backpack of stuff creating your own art but just the daily living with maybe birthdays, anniversaries, family holidays, other events, going to the beach or park etc .. get togethers with people you know.</p>

<p>Despite the ultra cheap 6x4 prices. Over the years I have printed less and less and when people ask me to take pictures of them with friends and family they are uploaded to social media the same evening but I never get asked for a print, a few people gave me their USB sticks and so they can view them electronically or they just download off Facebook or DropBox.</p>

<p>Even with our household it is viewed on TV once and that is it. There is even a member here that even snored. Equally they went overseas and didn't take any pictures, just because someone asked them they kind of took less than 10 on the first few days and then took 50 on the last day or two and nothing in between. </p>

<p> </p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>13 years ago I bought a back then decent & recommended office B&W laser and discovered that it generates ugly lines into on screen homogenous areas which are rather disappointing to me. - I would have wanted it to deliver something close to letterpress newspaper IQ since 600dpi and FM dithering should be able to compete with a 25l/cm screen.<br>

I posses darkroom equipment but haven't darkened & wired the bathroom yet. I am unwilling to buy anything inkjet; that technology is vexing to me and spending a cartridge set every year just to keep a printer from clogging is out of my price range or comfort zone.<br>

About every 5 years I start a thread or hit the electronics mall or a Xerox maintenance magician asking if somebody started making a printer for me: It should be great at sitting and rotting in the corner, deliver bearable B&W for cheap and fit on my scooter's rear seat. <br>

I have seen improved devices at work and might investigate if I'll want one myself or end going the hybrid way: aiming a paper loaded 13x18cm Linhof at the 4K screen.<br>

In general I am content with on screen viewing. - I don't have many walls to hang images.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>I bought an Epson inkjet printer when it was all the rage; the cartridge head clogged, the ink dried up, and I never printed photos again - that'd be at least 12 years ago.</p>

<p>I have a laser printer for documents and have looked at small 4x6 photo printers from time to time but never took the bait. </p>

<p>I have a couple of USB Polaroid printers that I'd love to use again if only affordable film was available.</p>

 

[Tony Parsons]

<p>I print several A4 images per month, purely for myself, and they are Blu-Tacked to furniture around my flat as my own 'art' gallery. I can't frame them and put them on my walls, as the landlord has a strict '1 picture hook per wall' policy, with which I have no quibble, so 'real' art is displayed in that fashion. I do occasionally cheat and hang two images from one hook.<br>

All my photos are for my own enjoyment - this is how I enjoy them.</p>

<p>Tony</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>I print quite a lot; for me to really see the image is to view it on a print. On screen viewing suffers from the fact that people's monitors and settings differ so much that often the impression of a digitally shared image isn't always what it should be, though good screens that are acceptable for casual viewing without calibration are more common now than they used to be. Also, I often want to see several images on one glance in full detail, so I can think about how they work together or if one is better than another, so I make prints and lay them on a table for review. I make prints maybe once a week when I'm not working on a project, I guess every day if I have something larger to work on.</p>

<p>I haven't had serious clogging issues in a long time. They were common with early consumer inkjets and these printers would only last for a short time (1-2 years) but with higher end, Epson K3 ink printers, I may get a clog once or twice a year, and it is usually solved by running a couple of cleaning cycles. I have another K3 ink machine at work and it is not used frequently, but it has never clogged. I do know that early consumer units were terrible in terms of longevity and reliability of the printer, and print permanence, but since I got over the idea that a printer could cost more than 300€, all these issues went away. I don't like waiting for a lab to make prints and prefer having the control and option to make changes quickly which I can only get by doing my own prints. In the darkroom I could never get the kind of consistency and dust free prints that I can get with printing my own images on an inkjet. And the blacks are deeper and nicer than on C type paper which many labs still use. Resistance to wear due to bad handling may be better on chemical prints, though. Commercial 4x6 prints made on non-archival process can be cheaper than printing on inkjet but if the process and materials are archival, then the cost gaps is reduced and as soon as one goes to larger print sizes, doing my own inkjet prints quickly become not only more convenient, less likely to be damaged in the mail, and less expensive also. Finally the huge mural size prints I can't do myself but then I don't have so much wall space to support that kind of acquisitions. Maybe one or two, but I prefer a layout of multiple images than a huge single image on a wall.</p>

<p>Is it a hassle to make prints? Yes, it is extra work, but nowhere near as bad as it was with getting images captured on film printed, and it's so much more rewarding to have full control. Do I show images to people digitally as well? Yes, of course, all the time.</p>

<p>Do other people ask for prints? Mostly they want digital images now, but when they see the prints, they are appreciated as well. I guess it depends on if they have the space for (storing and displaying) it or not. I guess today since so much can be seen on mobile devices and computers, many people are mostly storing their content there. I guess the cloud can provide some degree of longevity as long as the companies that implement them are afloat. I remain doubtful that digital content with casual maintenance can survive decades without some disaster making all the not so frequently backed up content that was forgotten to go away.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>When I have C41 film developed, I still ask for (4"x6") prints as I still like the moment to watch the photos when I come home, before I start scanning the negatives. The additional extra costs isn't over the top, and maybe it's just melancholic silliness, but I like those little moments.<br>

Last series of prints I made myself all happened to be gifts to others (no idea if that's casual ;-), but on average I do make a number of prints per month just for myself; using my own printer with good quality papers. Printing at home doesn't necessarily save money this way, but there is some satisfaction in a physical final product that I made end-to-end. <br>

Digital images are in many ways more convenient, more immediate and more practical, but a good print still easily holds its own as a way to see and enjoy a photo.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>I print or have printed my digital images regularly, but for only a small part of my photography. About 100 to 120 small prints and 20 to 30 large (to 12 x 18 inches, one to 20 x 30 inches) prints each year (excluding those prints for exhibition or sale, which is also of limited output for me).</p>

<p>I think that the ease of making and accessing digital screen images too easily ignores the considerable cost, uncertainty and complexity of their maintenance and preservation. While I love the efficiency of the process of casual or commercial digital image making and its short term ease of transfer to others, I dislike the considerable cost of the storage equipment and software needed to keep the images for future viewing and the uncertainty that the systems used today will allow sure access in future.</p>

<p>A casual C-41 or inkjet print, whether 4x6 inch or greater, may or may not be permanent (accurate colors, etc.) 20 or 100 years from now, but their tactile presence is I think their value, and they can be easily stored in photo books or otherwise. The longevity of my B&W darkroom prints is probably better, although whether that is significant or not for casual prints is a question. Once in a while my sister-in-law, inheritor of many casual family photos, will display some from the late 19th century and query the event or persons pictured in them. A good example I think of the tangible quality of prints.</p>

<p>A number of my larger books (mainly those of reference nature like monographs or atlases) have many small prints wedged between their pages and to open them from time to time for whatever spontaneous reason allows me to see again a casual print of some personal value from 10 or 20 or more years ago, a recurring pleasure. Will I do the same with my extensive digital files 10 years from now? Maybe.</p>

<p>I occasionally print at home digital images to see how they look on paper, but I mainly use commercial printers (from Walmart up in quality) on occasion for prints as my printer and my printing ability are both limited. About half of my printing there is for personal need (or given to friends who may be interested) and the other half for occasional exhibition and/or sale. I admit that they do not get much in the way of presentation afterwards, usually ending up in the home archives(attic) if not occasionally on a wall or a record put within the pages of a reference book.</p>

<p>My year end cards to friends (Christmas card and general seasonal greeting card) are home-made. The image I choose for the front side of them changes from year to year. There is some possibility that it will end up on a string or on the top of a cabinet and be visible for some short period of time for my friend and his community of acquaintances. So maybe 50 cards with a printed photo will be viewed by at least the same number of friends and probably more, potentially over a month period before discarding. This and the pleasure of viewing other small prints will sustain my interest in having prints of my images.</p>

<p>When I send a digital greeting by e-mail, the image will likely be viewed only once and by one person and then deleted or forgotten. </p>

[charles_stobbs3]

I have been thinking of making some prints of digital camera photos and scanned Kodachrome slides to

hang in the bedroom but am tempted to get them done commercially.

[AzDavid]

<p>I agree with Ilkka ... I love creating prints, especially when I have a great shot that I print larger than my computer screen. There was a time before the explosion of social media when I considered it a necessity to print virtually any decent photo. I still have the <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1867895,00.asp">HP Photosmart 475</a> that made it easy to do so. But times have changed. Photos get shared electronically. And I'm now printing only a handful of times a month. And there are issues. For example, creating accurate prints isn't easy. Even with the paper Canon has been giving away when you order ink, the ink is still expensive. And we all know how difficult it can be to get a print that looks like the digital image on your screen. Another issue is what to do with your prints after you've shown everyone in the house. There's only so much space for display. My small office has piles of prints with nowhere to go. The best time I had creating prints was when I was still teaching. I'd take shots all year and hang them in the classroom or hallway for students to enjoy. Then at year's end I'd give the prints away to students. </p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>All of my serious work gets printed, but I also try to print as many pictures of family, friends, etc., as I can, even if it's just a 4x6. My theory is that digital technology changes too fast and that my grandkids (when they are born) aren't going to have the slight clue what a thumb drive, external hard drive, CD or DVD is, let alone that they have photos on them or the right computer equipment to open the files and look at them. But if they've got a piece of paper with an image on it, the problem is solved.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>My last inkjet printer has long since dried up. For casual prints, CD jackets, etc., I use a fairly high-end Xerox color laser printer. For better quality, I have a small Canon Selphy dye sub printer, which produces outstanding 4x6 borderless prints, wirelessly from any computer. For serious work, I send it out. Even the local pharmacy has a 24" Epson printer, and produces excellent results if I do my job properly.</p>

<p>Printing isn't a big thing for me any more. All of my professional work is delivered electronically.</p>

[gordonjb]

<p>I have an Epson 3800 printer and it gets regular use. I've seldom had clogging issues until recently. Watched a few YouTube videos, did some, much overdue, cleaning and maintenance and clogging issues have gone away. I never really consider the photographic process finished until I am holding a print in my hands. I felt that way when I shot film and used a darkroom and I still feel that way now with digital.</p>

[rconey]

<p>I'm still printing for my pleasure. I frame and hang 13x19 images at home and work. I did learn to get frames with easily removed backs so that I just pull the matted old pictures out and replace with new ones. I recently resurrected my canon i9900 printer by replacing the printer head (eliminating a cyan color cast) for $100. Getting an image accurately to print is still a thrill.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Last Friday.

[Mark Keefer]

<p>It's been a long time. The cost of ink for both my big Epson R1800 or my Canon MG5400 keeps me from casually printing and I get better results getting prints done at the camera shop and it's been a couple years since I last had some prints done at the camera shop not counting wedding stuff I had done. I just enjoy the shots on my computer or Samsung tablet for myself, easier to show them that way too. Maybe if ink wasn't as expensive and cartridges lasted longer I would get into it more.</p>

[aplumpton]

<blockquote>

<p>"I never really consider the photographic process finished until I am holding a print in my hands."<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A lot can be said for that. There is nothing wrong with screen images, but do you not think that while an artist-painter might copy his or her work and show it electronically on a desktop or portable screen, most viewers would prefer the original canvas or paper to appreciate it. Photographs have a texture that screens cannot duplicate well. This is more relevant to large size image viewing than to viewing 4x6 inch photographs. </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Last time I printed was just before I upgraded to the latest OS. Now it looks like its working, but isn't.<br>

Like the Sleeping Beauty, I am hoping that someday my prints will come. :|</p>

[willis]

<p>I am into photo restoration. I have a Canon Selphy CP910.<br>

This gives me a 4" x 6" print. <br>

After a photo is restored, I pass the prints on to family and friends.<br>

Other than that, I use commercial printers for my enlargements.</p>

[rossb]

<p>I shoot B/W film as a hobby and I generally will print out some of the photos from each roll. I print 4x6 and an occasional 8x10 for framing. I maintain an organized and extensive set of family photo albums. I have printed in all sorts of sizes over the years but now it's just the 2 sizes mentioned. <br>

I shoot maybe 200 digital photos a year and I cannot remember the last time I printed one but I would if I felt like it. </p>

[mjferron]

<p>Maybe it might have something do with my personal printing skills but most often I think images look better on a back lit screen. Which bring up a new topic. Why are high end digital picture frames not more popular? Imagine a gallery with a hi rez screen (or one at your house showing you fav images and moving on to the next every 30 seconds or so.</p>

 

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Do you not think that while an artist-painter might copy his or her work and show it electronically on a desktop or portable screen, most viewers would prefer the original canvas or paper to appreciate it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

This defines false equivalency. If it was done on physical media first, of course. However, every artist I know when working in digital media shows it digitally. And photographs created digitally are the same.</p>

[aplumpton]

<blockquote>

<p>every artist I know when working in digital media shows it "digitally" </p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>(my quotation marks)</em></p>

<blockquote>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>So "digitally", unless you really want to say, "shows it on on a digital screen", means also "printed digitally", another option. Which is back to the question of exhibiting a print or not. I disagree that every artist is uniquely exhibiting his work on a digital screen (if that is your reasoning). Most artists I know, while treating or promoting their work on a screen are exhibiting and selling their their digital creations on canvas, paper, aluminum or other matrices. </p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>I printed yesterday. On an Epson inkjet. If the question was about darkroom - I did my last printing several years ago. Hell, I need to empty those tanks with developer and fixer, thanks for reminding:)</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Not that anyone gives a flying leap, but I did download a new (or merely different) driver from Epson, and my</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Prints has come.</p>

</blockquote>

[rossb]

<p>I guess I thought the topic was just "printing" from any means. However if it's dark room I do not. I shoot film, process at home, scan and print on an inkjet. I am buying a Canon inkjet in a couple weeks when they are in stock at BHPhoto. I am going to buy the IP8720 which has a "grey" cartridge along with the black. I was hoping my prints would benefit from that. But I need a printer anyway as my Artison 50 stopped working last week. It is old but it cranked out a lot of nice prints over the years. As I said before my photo hobby is B/W film. </p>