2 ms·
The article did not address this use case enough, but it was addressed in part. > Reproducing colors in photographs accurately demands a lot more than just som
by hydrox24 7y ago
The article did not address this use case enough, but it was addressed in part.
> Reproducing colors in photographs accurately demands a lot more than just some barrels of color ink; it demands a high-resolution printer and special, treated paper that can hold colors better than plain old printer paper can. You can buy that stuff too, of course, but doing so expensive and complicated, which makes it hard to recommend when you could alternately just send your photos to a photo printing service and get much better results than you’d get at home for a fraction of the price.
- muro 7y agoI don't think you get both higher quality and lower price. I like large prints (A2) of my photos. I print them at home, after disappointing results from a service. I bought a Canon imageprograf 1000 - the cartridges are very big and the print costs are somewhat reasonable. When using expensive paper, the quality is impressive. It's not a cheap hobby, whenever I change cartridges, it's about 500, which hurts. Luckily they last a while. At larger sizes, I still send them to a printing service, those printers would be too expensive and used very rarely.