Canon - PIXMA PRO-100

Roller marks problem how to fix: Get better quality paper (also some printers if you select thick paper on configurations, also make it leave less roller marks, don't know if this is the case). Or Get a printer that is more focused for photos. (right now the cheapest are the canon G5/6XX series). If you don't find them, then the Epson ET8500/8550 (they do still leave some roller marks but with better quality paper they are fine). Or the epson ET 8100/18100 (it's ink does not have lightfastness). I only recommend ink tank printers for most uses cases. If you are going for pro level printing and going to sell them for high price then there are the Canon Pixma Pro Line, and Epson Surecolor p700/900. About your brother, well i don't recommend because it's a cartridge printer(seriously this black that you used could easily be like 3-5% of all of it's black ink). I would return if still possible. And purchase any ink tank.(If you won't print like 40+ documents pages or 5+ photos a month then it's a fine printer, more than this only if you convert it for ciss or use somekind of compatible cartridge). Edit: Ohh and about consumer level printer that you want mostly for documents, and then some photos. Canon Megatank GXXXX series. And Epson ET 2/4XXX series, then you will compare price and what they offer, like duplex, in case of epson a4 borderless as well. IF you want fewer features but better photos, some epson have 4 dye ink that are better for printing on cheaper glossy ink (you can check if their black tank is the same size as the colored tanks, if it is the same size then it's ink is dye).

Liene Amber 4x6 has been pretty good, I like how quickly I can print, it feels more casual. I also have the Canon PIXMA Pro 100 for studio quality prints, but that's a much more involved process.

We have a Canon Pro 100, kinda old. Can it do this job?

I have one too and I've never had a problem with it that a cleaning didn't fix. I've printed thousands of greeting cards on it and it hasn't missed a beat. I've also let it sit for months and it fires right up and prints without problems with ink drying (although it may need a head cleaning). I got it for $100 with a big box of 13x19 Lustre paper.

I had been looking for an A3+ printer for a while, and as luck would have it one came up locally - a Canon Pro 100S with mostly new inks, for a price that wasn't that much more than the inks would cost. Its an older model now, but also its a printer - inkjet is a pretty mature technology at this point, a good used printer represents very good value for money. It was going well until I tried printing in A3 - I don't think this thing had been used to print in that size much, or at all, because all sorts of dirt and debris deposited on the paper on the areas of paper that would be outside of the smaller media size printing area, including bits of dead spider... Given it a good clean out, run the roller and plate cleaning routines several times and run a sheet of A3 through it several times to try and push anything nasty out. Seems to have done the job. Its been a fun weekend learning the ins and outs of printing at home. Colour profiles are an absolute nightmare, I was getting some weird colour shifts when I set a paper profile in the driver, or in Lightroom, which suggested a double colour profile was being applied somewhere. Turns out Windows Colour Management also applies a profile - with that turned off I started to get more consistent results. Anyway, if you were thinking about getting a printer, I say do it - the ability to just print any of my photos at a very high quality in anywhere from 4x6 to A3+ feels like a game changer. I've not run the numbers on running costs, but I believe this model isn't too bad.

I didn't have a particular preference for dye vs pigment here as I was looking at the low end of the used market - pretty much any still supported A3+ printer from Canon or Epson was the goal, and at this end of the market its difficult to be too fussy. I just missed a Pro 300 on Ebay but it went for just a bit more than my top bid. It also wasn't local, this 100S was within a 15 minute drive. I paid £120 and it came with pretty much full genuine inks so not too bad of a deal for an older model. I don't see it as an archival solution for me, more just for fun and being able to make nice prints for friends and family. I definitely get that sense of "finishing" a photo from the print too, its nice seeing it in my hands vs on a screen, it changes it entirely. I'm confident they'll last a long time though!

I use two, the Canon Pixma Pro 100 (which I pair with Canon Pro Luster paper and the official Canon ink when I want archival quality), and the Liene 4x6 Dye Sublimation printer. The Canon is much better for 'serious' work, the kind of thing you would want to hang in a gallery. The Liene is better for just quick and fun prints, vacation snapshots, family photos, stuff like that. Both are great, just different tools for different jobs. edit: I should mention that Canon had a black friday sale every year in which you could get the Pro 100 for about $150 (which is the cost of paper + ink), and it comes with starter amounts of paper and ink. I don't know if they are still doing that, but if so then it's a fantastic deal. At $500 or whatever the normal price is, it's only worth it if you'll be using it a lot or making money from selling prints.

Canon Pixma Pro 100. I've been using it for years, it's fantastic. Should be cheap too. They used to do black friday sales where the printer plus some starter ink and paper was $150.

Get a Brother black and white laser printer for the lawyer. I used to run IT for a big law firm, trust me on this one - this is the printer they need. Just a simple printer is best, like the HLL3295CDW. These are the most bulletproof printers I've ever administered. If they also need a scanner then get a Scansnap. Then for yourself get the Canon PIXMA Pro100, or a similar model. If you use the expensive official Canon photo paper and ink you'll get archival quality prints. Then get some cheap 3rd party ink for general color printing on standard paper. If you want cheap and fun photo prints, I'm also enjoying the Liene Amber 4x6 printer as well.

I think I covered this already in my post: > I like having a printer because (a) I can print whenever I want, on a whim, with instant results, and (b) I can fine-tune the colors and keep trying until I get the print result I'm looking for. [...] I'm not printing to try and save money. I understand that infrequent printing will require lots of ink just to keep the printer clean. However, my issue is that I am spending too much time cleaning the printer each time I want to use it. Professional printing doesn't achieve my goals, unfortunately. Can you help me understand what you mean about the size requirement putting me into a grey area? Is there something you'd recommend for a different size, or budget? I'm not horribly concerned about durability against UV. I'm looking for the best option for high-quality photo printing results (i.e. color reproduction, tonality, contrast) with minimal maintenance.

#What would you like to accomplish? I have a Canon Pixma Pro-100 that I bought for $50 on Craigslist and have been using for a few years. I like having a printer because (a) I can print whenever I want, on a whim, with instant results, and (b) I can fine-tune the colors and keep trying until I get the print result I'm looking for. I'm not printing to try and save money. I understand that infrequent printing will require lots of ink just to keep the printer clean. However, my issue is that I am spending too much _time_ cleaning the printer each time I want to use it. I either pull the print head, soak it in rubbing alcohol, and then let it dry for 24 hours; or I have to run 4-8 cleaning cycles before it is printing well again. This is so painful that it reduces the frequency with which I print, so it's a bit cyclical. #Are there any models you are currently looking at? I've heard from some EcoTank users that this is just not an issue for them. After reading a bit, it sounds like this may be because the EcoTank - when left powered on - will continuously flow a bit of ink through the printhead to avoid clogs. I do not believe my Pixma Pro-100 has this feature. As a result, I'm currently looking at the EcoTank ET-8550. A couple concerns though: - It takes 6 colors whereas my Pro-100 takes 8 cartridges. I assume this means I will have less gamut. - It's billed as an "all-in-one" printer, which makes it sound more focused on office use cases. I only want it for printing photos. - Buy once, cry once, right? I hear pigment printers create prints that last much longer. So with all of this in mind, is there a better printer for me? #More Details: Questions|Answers :--|:-- Budget: | $1,500 Country: | USA Color or black and white: | Color Laser or ink printer: | Ink New or used: | Either Multi-function: | Not necessary Duplex Printing: | Not necessary Home or business: | Home Printing content: | Photos Printing frequency: | Weekly/monthly. Pages per minute : | Don't care Page size: | 13" x 19" or larger Device printing from: | Mac Connection type: | Wifi

Nice! I have the Pixma Pro 100, it's been a reliable printer for years. What I've found is that when using Canon ink and Canon paper, I get true archival quality prints that resist UV. If I use the 3rd party ink on Canon paper, they look almost identical initially but will fade to red after about a year (with or without UV exposure). So I've started using the 3rd party ink for stuff like test prints, contact sheets, or anything that is meant to be temporary like printing birthday party invites. Works fine for standard document printing as well. Then I save the Canon ink for art prints. My biggest problem with the printer is it is just massive, I can't figure out a good place to put it, so it mostly lives on the floor. The wifi feature works well, so it can be anywhere in the house, doesn't need to be tethered to a computer.

'Files from my childhood', that threw me for a minute, haha, it was all film in those days. Yes, I still have those prints, though I don't always have the negs as everything I shot back then was on disposable cameras. My family still has negs and prints from my father's and grandfather's photography going back over 100 years, and a lot of those are darkroom prints. As for digital, I built my first file server about 20 years ago, and have cloud / offsite backups as well, no worries there! I highly recommend against using SSDs for any sort of long term storage. Think of an SSD (and any flash media, such as an SD card) as a battery - if you let it sit without power in a closet for a long time, it will slowly discharge. Once the voltage gets low enough that the computer can't tell if the data is supposed to be a 0 or a 1, then effectively the data is lost with no chance of recovery. Magnetic drives and tape don't have this problem (well, technically they do as the earth's magnetic field will discharge them slowly over time, but that process takes decades). In either case, if you are powering the drive on consistently then it should be an issue, and I definitely recommend using a RAID array or something similar to make data recovery simpler. I agree that archival inkjet is the best option for digital photography today, though an actual photographic print made in a darkroom can last even longer. The storage scenario is more important than the medium in this case. I'm fairly certain my childhood photos shot on disposable cameras are dye sub as they certainly look like it, but I could be wrong. I've found value both in archival printing as well as more casual printing, the dye sub prints are just more kid friendly for example, I can let my daughter handle them and build her own album without worrying about them being ruined by fingerprints or creases. For anything I would hang in a gallery, I use inkjet or photographic prints from an enlarger.

canon pixma pro 100 + accurip emerald for half tones. thank me later. enjoy!