Groups

    Is it still much cheaper/better to to print photos in store as oppossed to at home?

    I am considering getting a home photo printer as I have hundreds of photos to print out. I know a few years ago the advice was just to get it done online or instore as the quality and price was better. Has anything changed? Is it more economical to do it myself. Can anyone give me an idea of the per print price not taking into account the cost of the printer, just the paper and ink.

    Usually places like snapfish have prices of around 5-9p per print without any promotions.

    16 Comments

    If you shop around you can get the paper quite cheap, such as under 2p a sheet (6x4) from ]this deal. Ink costs depend very much on the printer and whether or not you are using original inks, but if you can find a good deal on online printing (or exploit several 'free' signing up offers) it will generally work out cheaper...

    Original Poster

    Yeah, I've been exploiting the snapfish 1p per print for 50 photos for my girlfriend, and have done it in the past for myself, just can't be bothered to register loads of different accounts again. Anyway, think I have used all available email addresses for registration. This is why I'm now looking into buying a printer as I'm into my photography and have hundreds of photos from the past few years of travelling and working abroad that I haven't got round to printing.

    I find it cheaper ordering them via snapfish

    Of course having your own printer lets you do larger prints too (if its an A4 printer). You certainly used to be able to get (much cheaper) third party replacement inks for some brands of printer (Epson, Canon) but not so sure if that still applies these days...

    think of it like making your own wine. it takes a few tries before you get it right.
    if you need extra - go down the offy!

    the moral of this story is - for 1's and 2's - print your own - if you have 100's - snapfish or in-store digital services are pretty good. (and probably will work cheaper as ink and 'photo' paper can be costly to make mistakes on!

    -good luck!

    -radishnet

    jah128;6185188

    Of course having your own printer lets you do larger prints too (if its … Of course having your own printer lets you do larger prints too (if its an A4 printer).


    I think that's the significant thing. Larger prints are very expensive from the on-line people.
    I've been looking at the Canon Pixma iP 4600, cheapest at Amazon now at £78.80 or there abouts ( next cheapest is+£10). There is a new model, the 4700, little different, it seems,
    reviewed here:
    pcpro.co.uk/rev…700
    It says:
    That makes for a photo cost of around 11.4p before paper costs are added

    If you do print your own at home how long will the ink last before it fades? I'm sure I read several years ago that the ink would fade after 20 years.........anyone know?

    Edit - just googled

    seems to range from 11 years to over a hundred
    pcworld.com/art…tml

    gari189;6185535

    If you do print your own at home how long will the ink last before it … If you do print your own at home how long will the ink last before it fades? I'm sure I read several years ago that the ink would fade after 20 years.........anyone know?



    Depends on the paper and the ink, and where the photo is kept. I think the branded photo-quality inks are meant to last a decent length of time, but where its kept makes a huge difference - they can noticably fade over a matter of weeks if exposed to very bright sunlight..

    Oh right, I never thought of that Gari. You would have thought that things might have moved on from you 'find'.
    I suppose it's the comparison of home-printed v 'professional/on-line' that we want in respect of the factors that you have mentioned jah.

    Banned

    chesso;6185649

    Oh right, I never thought of that Gari. You would have thought that … Oh right, I never thought of that Gari. You would have thought that things might have moved on from you 'find'.I suppose it's the comparison of home-printed v 'professional/on-line' that we want in respect of the factors that you have mentioned jah.



    Also...... dont get home printed pics wet!

    Shop printed are so much better than inkjet prints.

    You can do it on the cheap, with cheap paper and cheap ink, but it will show in the quality.

    guv;6185663

    Also...... dont get home printed pics wet!Shop printed are so much better … Also...... dont get home printed pics wet!Shop printed are so much better than inkjet prints.


    And... Don't dry clean either.:roll:
    Don't use clothes dye thinking it'll be cheaper.

    peodude;6185829

    You can do it on the cheap, with cheap paper and cheap ink, but it will … You can do it on the cheap, with cheap paper and cheap ink, but it will show in the quality.



    The consensus on-line is that you're best off ( but not financially) with the printer's own premium quality paper.
    wilhelm-research.com/dnc…pdf

    I have also discovered that matt paper is best for B&W and very large photos and gloss is best for all the rest, allowing for personal preferences of course.

    This Henry Wilhelm guy (the subject of the article above)seems to be the top bloke to listen to.
    wilhelm-research.com/
    wilhelm-research.com/pdf…pdf

    Thanks for the kick-start on thinking about this gari:thumbsup:

    Banned

    much cheaper and better quality online

    never paid more than 1p for 6x4 prints apart from P&P and must have printed over 1000 pics

    no cutting out to do either!

    csiman;6186324

    much cheaper and better quality onlinenever paid more than 1p for 6x4 … much cheaper and better quality onlinenever paid more than 1p for 6x4 prints apart from P&P and must have printed over 1000 picsno cutting out to do either!



    There is a 1p per print advert on the sky news website atm, if that helps. No idea of the T&C's tho.

    chesso;6186169

    And... Don't dry clean either.:roll:Don't use clothes dye thinking it'll … And... Don't dry clean either.:roll:Don't use clothes dye thinking it'll be cheaper.The consensus on-line is that you're best off ( but not financially) with the printer's own premium quality paper.http://www.wilhelm-research.com/dnc/D&C_Perm_Article_2005_04_03.pdfI have also discovered that matt paper is best for B&W and very large photos and gloss is best for all the rest, allowing for personal preferences of course.This Henry Wilhelm guy (the subject of the article above)seems to be the top bloke to listen to.http://www.wilhelm-research.com/http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pdf/GreatOutput_HW_RayW_Feb2004.pdfThanks for the kick-start on thinking about this gari:thumbsup:



    Thanks for researching this Chesso :thumbsup:

    Banned

    greg_68;6186336

    There is a 1p per print advert on the sky news website atm, if that … There is a 1p per print advert on the sky news website atm, if that helps. No idea of the T&C's tho.


    I just re-use snapfish all the time with new accounts :thumbsup:
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. So Brexit isn't going how a lot of Brexiters thought it would2467
      2. Just heard this...2 ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ congrats to all on 392k ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★7767377
      3. U.S. bombers fly off North Korea's coast in show of force1217
      4. Whoops SNP...Grenfell style cladding all over Glasgow817

      See more discussions