Need a new Printer

[ivinsfan]

I noticed in the Amazon thread that Walt43 just picked up a new printer. I need to start checking them out for a possible Black Friday purchase.

For many years we ran dell all in one's and found them great, that is until we needed to upgrade them to a new operating system. XP to Windows 7 ended up needing to get a new printer because we just could not get the drivers to work. The last printer wouldn't upgrade from 7 to Windows 8.I went to Dell and you couldn't get more then a chat session that told you to upgrade and install your drivers..didn't work. The drivers would install but not talk to the printer.

In disgust we bought a cheapo Epson that upgraded quite nicely when we switched from Windows 8 to 10. But I have decades of old family pictures I want to scan and store in the cloud and also share on FB where we have an extended family picture page. My cheap Epson simply copies or scans the picture the same as it would copy a piece of paper, in other words you just see a copy of the picture not a true scan of it. No quality at all.

My Dells were much better and it was like looking at the actual picture and not just a copy of it. I guess since we just upgraded to Win 10 I could get a Dell made for 10 and I would get a few years use out of it. But honestly I'm disgusted with the lack of technical support on their printers.

Can any of you who scan and store photos point me toward a good middle end printer? I'm not even sure what I should be looking for in the specs. Thanks in advance.

 

[Walt34]

For scanning photos I use an Espson 9000F photo scanner, I think it was ~$250. That model isn't made anymore. I have used the scanner in the Dell 1235cn printer but the quality of course is not as good.

It depends on what you want to do with the resulting image. If it is for on-screen display only, you do not need near the same quality as you would for an 8x10 print so the quality of the scanner built in to a printer may well be good enough. I'll let you know how the scanner on the E525W works. For the price I paid I don't expect much but hey, I might be surprised.

 

[Big_Hitter]

I've got one of these - it's pretty awesome

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00C6MNP52/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[Spudd]

I've got one of these - it's pretty awesome

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00C6MNP52/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

An Alien Species Intervention?

Personally I prefer laser printers as long as you don't need to print photos. I have a Brother all-in-one laser that's been working great for me, DCP-L2540DW. The scanning function works very well. I got it to replace my 10-year-old very similar Brother laser which still works perfectly except the automatic document feeder for the scanner started acting up. So I have faith that this one will have similar longevity.

The advantage to lasers is the ink can't dry out, and it's much cheaper to print. The disadvantage is they're usually a little more expensive up front, and if you want to print photos, they're not very suitable for that.

 

[braumeister]

I use an Epson V500 scanner that has given exceptional service. Bought it about four years ago for $160 at a local Staples, and it's now $384 on Amazon. It handles anything, even including old 35mm slides.

For printing, I use a Brother HL-5280DW laser printer (black & white) that has been flawless for over eight years. I paid $320 back then, but they're no longer made. I'd buy another Brother laser printer in a heartbeat.

For color photos, I recently bought a Canon iP8700. For the few months I've used it, the quality has been outstanding and I'm very pleased with it. Nowhere as expensive as I thought a good photo printer would be (less than $300) and easy to set up and use.

 

[Walt34]

For color photos, I recently bought a Canon iP8700. For the few months I've used it, the quality has been outstanding and I'm very pleased with it. Nowhere as expensive as I thought a good photo printer would be (less than $300) and easy to set up and use.

For color photos I use a Canon Pixma Pro-100. At the time they had a $300 rebate (really!) on them so I got a $400 printer for $100. Of course the ink cartridges are expensive but the prints are gallery quality and like yours it prints up to 13"x19". I have several prints framed and hanging on the wall around the house.

 

[ivinsfan]

Yes I am thinking I might have to buy a stand alone photo scanner, but I don't really want to add another machine to my set-up. I'd prefer a higher quality scanner on my printer.

 

[ivinsfan]

For scanning photos I use an Espson 9000F photo scanner, I think it was ~$250. That model isn't made anymore. I have used the scanner in the Dell 1235cn printer but the quality of course is not as good.

It depends on what you want to do with the resulting image. If it is for on-screen display only, you do not need near the same quality as you would for an 8x10 print so the quality of the scanner built in to a printer may well be good enough. I'll let you know how the scanner on the E525W works. For the price I paid I don't expect much but hey, I might be surprised.

What about for scanning and storing to the cloud, what quality would you need for that, assuming someday someone might want a paper image of the photo.

 

[target2019]

I have this:
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-ImageCLASS-MF4350d-Laser-Printer/dp/B001EWDXO8

The cost is high, since the model is discontinued. A ripoff that I have seen often.

It is a very good all-in-one printer, and I've used it very sparingly for fax. As a laser printer, it is very cheap to operate. The toner cartridges last a long time.

The scanner and software are also very good. However, if you have a lot to scan, something newer will operate faster.

I am not a fan of wireless printers. This one is connected to computer with USB. I wish I had gotten network for another $100 or so.

About 3-4 years ago, or more, I bought this b/w laser and an HP color laser CP2025. No complaints with either. Laser cartridges cost more, but your cost per print is much lower.

Scanning requires a solid workflow. You can spend too much time on the task. Have to laugh, as my spouse just lays out the old photo, and captures to her iphone, then post to facebook in a minute or two.

 

[target2019]

What about for scanning and storing to the cloud, what quality would you need for that, assuming someday someone might want a paper image of the photo.

If you have google cloud, there are specs for image size that allow you to circumvent any storage limitations.

I put a limited amount of stuff up there. And my workflow always starts with hi-res scans placed on a local computer. I do not trust the future...

 

[Walt34]

What about for scanning and storing to the cloud, what quality would you need for that, assuming someday someone might want a paper image of the photo.

That's the problem. If you want a print, that is going to require a much higher pixel density, say 200 ppi or more depending on the size of the print. For simple on-screen display you can get away with 72 ppi or even less for a small screen like an iPhone. And of course the higher the density the larger the file size.

 

[target2019]

I wasn't aware of this, but Google Photos will downsample the upload so you get unlimited storage. For example, if your scan was 25 mega pixel, it will be downsampled to less than 16 mega pixel.

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/05/29/a-close-look-at-google-photos-unlimited-storage-offer/

Through the Canon scanning software, I usually make adjustments depending on the photo quality and the photo size. For an important 3x5 color photo, I may use 300 or 600dpi setting, so that I have more pixels for future use.

For an 8x10 color photo, I probably go with 200 or 300dpi.

I save in compressed TIF.

 

[ivinsfan]

Once again, I'm overwhelmed by what I don't know...I think that if I am going to the trouble of scanning and sorting pictures the cloud is the way to go....I have some homework to do.

 

[target2019]

Start here ->

https://www.google.com/search?q=scan+to+the+cloud&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Looks like each scanner manufacturer has a deal with a default cloud provider. But you can probably modify that to whatever you want.

To be honest, I did not think of this. Someone who uses this scan to cloud feature would be a better person to comment.

If I did that, there is probably an option to save a duplicate scan locally, on your computer.

 

[frank]

I use an epson workforce 545 and it does pictures and scan very well. the ink can be purchased on the internet cheap. I also bought a cheaper newer epson and If I had it to do all over again I would spend a little more money for the better grade of epson. the 545 is a few years old, but when I changed to windows 10 and the windows 10 upgrade epson had software already available on their site and it worked flawlessly.

 

[RonBoyd]

I agree with the above statement: "It depends on what you want to do with the resulting image."

About ten years ago, I too, had many old photographs that I wanted to scan -- many of which were "negatives" and "positives (slides). I purchased a Microtek i900 (see review below) and have scanned many thousands since then (30k plus). I use VueScan as the scanning software.

Anyway, I scan at 800DPI (choice from 100 to 3,200DPI) and 48 Bit to a .TIF file. This gives "scan" files about 5-6MBs of 3x5 prints. This produces a very high quality image (especially of film scans). This is real overkill if one wishes look at the images on a computer monitor or simply print them in an e-mail or on Facebook. (Facebook is going to lower the quality considerably, however, no matter what the original quality is.) On the other hand, if one is going to have the images reproduced professionally (Blurb, for instance) or with a personal high quality Photo Printer, then the use if something like Lightroom or Photoshop is necessary and the higher the quality of the original image the better.

The problem I have with the "Cloud" is twofold; one, that it takes so long to upload images to -- it is estimated that my 100,000 image collection (one of two) would take over a week to upload. Two, my lack of trust in the long-term mortality of the current crop of "Cloud" providers -- but then I am the eternal pessimist.

I am putting the Link to the i900 Review simply to give you an idea of how deeply you can get into this. I am, also, showing Links to Microtek -- since the i900 is about 12 years old, I am sure the specs have changed considerably. And for good measure the Links to VueScan (which you may want to explore no matter what scanner you decide on) and Blurb.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/MI9/MI9.HTM
Products
https://www.hamrick.com/ (Vuescan)
Create and self-publish books, magazines & ebooks | Blurb

 

[ivinsfan]

Well RonBoyd you have put in the time in the trenches so I will pay close attention to the links you provided. We have our long Northern winter coming soon and I will definitely have the time to do this right.