On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in comparison with laser printers?

It's very good quality, but with inkjet printers Catch 22 applies.

The printers themselves are not particularly expensive, but the ink is - especially OEM ink. If you use the printer a fair amount, it will be
expensive (you can try a non-OEM ink substitute, but it will probably invalidate your guarantee if anything goes wrong). If you don't use the
printer that much, you will almost certainly find that after a while the
jets get clogged and require cleaning - which will waste ink. The lower
the usage, the more likely it is to get blocked too.

Others here might have experience of printing photos with a laser
printer and can comment on the quality.

--
Jeff

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Jeff Layman <[email protected]d> wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in comparison with laser printers?

What kind of print volume do you expect, in terms of pages per month?

It's very good quality, but with inkjet printers Catch 22 applies.

The printers themselves are not particularly expensive, but the ink is - especially OEM ink. If you use the printer a fair amount, it will be expensive (you can try a non-OEM ink substitute, but it will probably invalidate your guarantee if anything goes wrong). If you don't use the printer that much, you will almost certainly find that after a while the
jets get clogged and require cleaning - which will waste ink. The lower
the usage, the more likely it is to get blocked too.

If this is going to be to any volume, invest in either a 'tank' printer,
which doesn't have individual cartridges with a teaspoon of ink (literally) inside but has 50-300ml tanks of ink. They're more expensive but allow you
to use any kind of aftermarket ink (the printer can't tell you're using unauthorised ink, unless you get it badly wrong and clog it), and even OEM
ink is much cheaper in bulk.

Or you can fit continuous ink supply system (CISS) which is the same
idea but for a printer not designed for it. They're available aftermarket
for some models:
https://www.cityinkexpress.co.uk/

or you can DIY your own:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTTLUiHyPrw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU8Q7cRLbLY
(see also his other videos)

DIY can be hit and miss depending on the specifics of the particular
printer, especially with whether you can disable 'replace cartridge'
messages.

Inkjet printers are more fickle, all told. But some of the photos are very good - a common word is 'giclee' which is a term for professional artist printing. However for that you need many inks (6-12) and special paper,
which also costs.

Others here might have experience of printing photos with a laser
printer and can comment on the quality.

I think it depends what you want to achieve. Laser photos can be 'ok' but
they aren't the kind of thing you'd want to hang on your wall. However
inkjets can be a big hassle and expense. So if this is more church
newsletter than fashion magazine then you may find it's better to go laser
and sacrifice quality for reduced costs and dependability of a laser.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in comparison with laser printers?

I've found colour laser printers can print a pretty good grey scale and acceptable.

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and unreliable.

Choose a printer from the cost of consumables aspect. Whenever I have
needed a printer I look at cheapest first and then check up toner costs.
I then keep going until I have a reasonable compromise.

Second tip, don't update the printer firmware in case third party
cartridges stop working.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in comparison with laser printers?

When you say someone else will print out the newsletter/magazine, I presume
you are sending them files direct for publishing. Therefore, if all you
want is a copy for proof reading or getting a feel for what the finished publication will look like then how photorealistic pictures will appear may
not be important even in a professionally printed community magazine it
will not warrant a forensic quality court approved image. How accurate
photos will appear is not just down to the printer but also the camera or scanner. I would go for whatever your budget allows perhaps as someone has pointed out already a printer that has refillable tanks rather than
cartridges if going for an inkjet. As for colour lasers having to replace
toner cartridges can be very expensive for doing one off prints. I had one which cost more to replace the toners than the printer with a set of
partially filled toner cartridges out of the box.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:25:35 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and unreliable.

The last 3 I had (paid for by work, luckily) all clogged irreparably
because they only got used once a month if lucky.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:28:43 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:09:59 +0100, Jeff Layman <[email protected]d>
wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text
in comparison with laser printers?

It's very good quality, but with inkjet printers Catch 22 applies.

The printers themselves are not particularly expensive, but the ink
is - especially OEM ink. If you use the printer a fair amount, it
will be expensive (you can try a non-OEM ink substitute, but it will >probably invalidate your guarantee if anything goes wrong). If you
don't use the printer that much, you will almost certainly find that
after a while the jets get clogged and require cleaning - which will
waste ink. The lower the usage, the more likely it is to get blocked
too.

Thanks, with an inkjet I'd probably want to use third party ink. So
I'll need to research which printers make this as easy as possible.

Others here might have experience of printing photos with a laser
printer and can comment on the quality.

You'll need to use photo paper to get brochure quality prints, and as
that's normally heavier, check the printer GSM spec.If you ever expect
to print on card, you'll need one that can do 300 GSM, and with a rear
feed to keep the paper path fairly straight.

There are brochure-quality lasers, but they tend to be more expensive
than inkjets.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:25:35 +0100, Fredxx <[email protected]d>
wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

I've found colour laser printers can print a pretty good grey scale and >acceptable.

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and >unreliable.

Choose a printer from the cost of consumables aspect. Whenever I have >needed a printer I look at cheapest first and then check up toner costs.
I then keep going until I have a reasonable compromise.

Sounds like a good way of processing the choice.

+1. It can cost somewhere between <1p and 50p a page, so it makes a big difference.

I always choose printers which can take aftermarket supplies, because often
the business model is to suck you in with a low price and then expect to
make it back massive by the official ink/toner. If the printer lets you use aftermarket then you can sidestep this and make the running costs much
cheaper. However the printer manufacturers don't want you to do this and so they try to block it - cartridges have chips in them so the printer can
check they're 'genuine'. In particular you ideally shouldn't connect the printer to the internet or run the vendor USB drivers, as sometimes vendors ship new firmware out of the blue which blocks new types of aftermarket cartridges.

Generally speaking Brother is best for lasers as their blocking is somewhat behind the competition, although catching up. HP are worst.

For inkjets I've found Epson to be troublesome, Canon a little better, HP
also have a bad reputation.

Another fun wheeze is multifunction printers which refuse to scan when they
run out of ink. Better to have separate units.

Unfortunately it's a bit of a minefield and a cat and mouse game if you
don't want to be in hoc to the manufacturer and use the printer your way.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 14 May 2025 13:50:15 +0100, Mike Halmarack wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:51:41 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:25:35 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and
unreliable.

The last 3 I had (paid for by work, luckily) all clogged irreparably >>because they only got used once a month if lucky.

I suppose a weekly maintence run might be a bit of a chore.

You get to the point (as I did) where the only thing the ink gets used
for is the weekly stay-unclogged run.

Last time I *needed* a hard copy was for a letter to the DWP*. I used an
online service to print and post the letter. A fraction of the cost of a printer for a once every 2 years occurrence.

*Why they can't accept an email I don't know. Presumably they are making
sure it takes off.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 13:46, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:28:43 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:09:59 +0100, Jeff Layman <[email protected]d>
wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text
in comparison with laser printers?

It's very good quality, but with inkjet printers Catch 22 applies.

The printers themselves are not particularly expensive, but the ink
is - especially OEM ink. If you use the printer a fair amount, it
will be expensive (you can try a non-OEM ink substitute, but it will
probably invalidate your guarantee if anything goes wrong). If you
don't use the printer that much, you will almost certainly find that
after a while the jets get clogged and require cleaning - which will
waste ink. The lower the usage, the more likely it is to get blocked
too.

Thanks, with an inkjet I'd probably want to use third party ink. So
I'll need to research which printers make this as easy as possible.

Others here might have experience of printing photos with a laser
printer and can comment on the quality.

You'll need to use photo paper to get brochure quality prints, and as
that's normally heavier, check the printer GSM spec.If you ever expect
to print on card, you'll need one that can do 300 GSM, and with a rear
feed to keep the paper path fairly straight.

There are brochure-quality lasers, but they tend to be more expensive
than inkjets.

A few maybe relevant observations
- for 1 200 brochure run, buying a laser printer was cheaper than the
print shop.
- Color rendition varies from ink to ink. Cheap replacement carttidges
my not be the same color as originals
- inkjets are useless for occasional usage. Also colors can fade.
- Lasers are in nearly all ways better excpt maybe for photos


--
I was brought up to believe that you should never give offence if you
can avoid it; the new culture tells us you should always take offence if
you can. There are now experts in the art of taking offence, indeed
whole academic subjects, such as 'gender studies', devoted to it.

Sir Roger Scruton

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:32:45 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

I wonder whether scanners are really necessary at all in many cases considering the availability of digital cameras for a work around.

If you do anything with images that need the geometry to be correct,
you do, but for general document archiving, probably not. There are
what are basic rostrum camera mechanisms for sitting a phone on to get
fairly good geometry, but a reasonable scanner is cheaper.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <[email protected]>,
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 13:13:28 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 13:50:15 +0100, Mike Halmarack wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:51:41 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
<[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:25:35 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and >>>> unreliable.

The last 3 I had (paid for by work, luckily) all clogged irreparably >>>because they only got used once a month if lucky.

I suppose a weekly maintence run might be a bit of a chore.

You get to the point (as I did) where the only thing the ink gets used
for is the weekly stay-unclogged run.

Thanks for confirming that it would be weekly. Being retired, I don't
mind a few chores.

Last time I *needed* a hard copy was for a letter to the DWP*. I used an >online service to print and post the letter. A fraction of the cost of a >printer for a once every 2 years occurrence.

I'm still trying to work out to what extent such a service would be an
option for my project.

One option would be to follow my example. I have an A3 colour laser an A4
mono laser and a portable inkjet.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4t�
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 15:06, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:32:45 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

I wonder whether scanners are really necessary at all in many cases
considering the availability of digital cameras for a work around.

If you do anything with images that need the geometry to be correct,
you do, but for general document archiving, probably not. There are
what are basic rostrum camera mechanisms for sitting a phone on to get
fairly good geometry, but a reasonable scanner is cheaper.

All cameras suffer from pin cushion, barrel and simple focal length
distortion. Scanners do not. If you really want to reproduce a flat
object accurately you need a process camera that has a very restricted
range of focal lengths over which none of these effects are significant.

A scanner is cheaper



--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 14:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 14/05/2025 13:46, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:28:43 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:09:59 +0100, Jeff Layman <[email protected]d>
wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text
in comparison with laser printers?

It's very good quality, but with inkjet printers Catch 22 applies.

The printers themselves are not particularly expensive, but the ink
is - especially OEM ink. If you use the printer a fair amount, it
will be expensive (you can try a non-OEM ink substitute, but it will
probably invalidate your guarantee if anything goes wrong). If you
don't use the printer that much, you will almost certainly find that
after a while the jets get clogged and require cleaning - which will
waste ink. The lower the usage, the more likely it is to get blocked
too.

Thanks, with an inkjet I'd probably want to use third party ink. So
I'll need to research which printers make this as easy as possible.

Others here might have experience of printing photos with a laser
printer and can comment on the quality.

You'll need to use photo paper to get brochure quality prints, and as
that's normally heavier, check the printer GSM spec.If you ever expect
to print on card, you'll need one that can do 300 GSM, and with a rear
feed to keep the paper path fairly straight.

There are brochure-quality lasers, but they tend to be more expensive
than inkjets.

A few maybe relevant observations
- for 1 200 brochure run, buying a laser printer was cheaper than the
print shop.
- Color rendition varies from ink to ink. Cheap replacement carttidges
my not be the same color as originals
- inkjets are useless for occasional usage. Also colors can fade.

I think I must be very lucky then or they are getting less worse. I have
an Epson XP-355 and I think its not printed more than 20 or 30 pages in
the 9 years I have had it. Its in my holiday home and was bought for
printing boarding passes. I thought as I didn't visit for over a year
during lock down it would be toast, but it was still working in March.

In my main house there is a Brother MFA that again gets very light use
and again it seems fine.

- Lasers are in nearly all ways better excpt maybe for photos

I have had very bad experiences with Lexmark Lasers in the small office environment.

.. what I can't find these days is a printer that doesn't lose its
warrenty when you cancel the ink subscription

Dave

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 15:06, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:32:45 +0100
Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

I wonder whether scanners are really necessary at all in many cases
considering the availability of digital cameras for a work around.

If you do anything with images that need the geometry to be correct,
you do, but for general document archiving, probably not. There are
what are basic rostrum camera mechanisms for sitting a phone on to get
fairly good geometry, but a reasonable scanner is cheaper.

Yes but a scanner with a sheet feeder is a totally different beast.....

Dave

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in comparison with laser printers?

This is a deep subject - and much will depend no the eventual workflow.
If the actual volume printing is being done by a print shop etc, then
what you choose may not matter much, since most will take print ready
copy as a PDF.

Many printers these days seem to follow the Gillette model of pricing
(loss leader hardware, expensive consumables, with many building DRM
into their inks/toners to try ans restrict you to OEM consumables). For
Lasers, Brother are one of the few holdouts that don't go too far out of
their way to be obnoxious. (cf stories of Canon multi-function devices
that will not even scan if they are low on ink).

If you do get one that is network connected, make sure it can't reach
the internet. That way you only do a firmware upgrade if you want to do
it, and should not suddenly find it now does less that what you paid for!

Generally inkjet is cheaper to buy, more expensive to run (although note
a full set of toner carts can be several hundred quid on a colour laser
even if they are significantly lower cost per page).

Inject has the edge on top end glossy photographic prints - but colour
lasers are pretty good these days. Laser equal or better on "business
colour" (graphs, charts, colour heading on plain paper etc)

If you want top end colour photo output / print ready proofing, you
could look at "dye-sub" printers.

If you want volume inkjet, look at those that allow the use of
continuous ink feed systems (external tanks of ink linked by tubes to
the print head, rather than teeny cartridges with small volumes of ink
inside). Often available for some Epson inkjets.

You may even find a budget mono laser is adequate - proof colour stuff
on screen, layout etc in black and white on paper, and send PDF in
colour to the printers.

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \=================================================================/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 14 May 2025 09:53:34 +0100, Mike Halmarack
<[email protected]> wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in >comparison with laser printers?

What is the purpose of the 162pm?
If it is just for proofing then surely any printer will do.
The copies that are printed elsewhere should be printed from your file
so the quality of your printer is irrelevant.
(I haven't read all the replies to your message, in case anyone else
has touched on these points.)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 18:59, Peter Johnson wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 09:53:34 +0100, Mike Halmarack
<[email protected]> wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

What is the purpose of the 162pm?
If it is just for proofing then surely any printer will do.
The copies that are printed elsewhere should be printed from your file
so the quality of your printer is irrelevant.
(I haven't read all the replies to your message, in case anyone else
has touched on these points.)

Our *community matters* publication *The Pump* is A5 format from folded
A4 sheet.
I guess you would need a printer with that facility.

I am very happy with my Epson ET-2650 although it did have *insufficient memory* issues run on W7. Couple of upgrades from Epson and the problem
has not repeated on W11.

Flat scanner screen, density/size adjustable. Now on my second tank fill
using compatible inks. (6 years plus)

Not in daily use but probably several times per week.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 11:32, David Paste wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

Depending on what quality you expect from a laser printed photo, you
might be surprised. I used to have an HP colour laser and I was! May
well be better than you imagine.

Inkjets can do incredible jobs with images, but the choice of paper is
more important (ink soaking and spreading, etc) so it's easier to get a crappy image out of an inkjet printer than you'd perhaps think.

If you have the ability - perhaps going to somewhere like PC World - ask
for a demo: take an image of your own, and the type of paper you will be usiing, and print it on an inket and a colour laser. There's no
substitute for direct examination! Look at it under the shop lights AND
under sunlight.

Once you have two examples, then it's easy to do the mathematics of
running costs & print costs, etc.

Good luck!

PC World have long gone (Currys ?) & I don't know of any equivalents.


--
Regards
wasbit

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 13:55, Mike Halmarack wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 10:51:04 -0000 (UTC), Tricky Dicky <[email protected]> wrote:

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

When you say someone else will print out the newsletter/magazine, I presume >> you are sending them files direct for publishing. Therefore, if all you
want is a copy for proof reading or getting a feel for what the finished
publication will look like then how photorealistic pictures will appear may >> not be important even in a professionally printed community magazine it
will not warrant a forensic quality court approved image. How accurate
photos will appear is not just down to the printer but also the camera or
scanner. I would go for whatever your budget allows perhaps as someone has >> pointed out already a printer that has refillable tanks rather than
cartridges if going for an inkjet. As for colour lasers having to replace
toner cartridges can be very expensive for doing one off prints. I had one >> which cost more to replace the toners than the printer with a set of
partially filled toner cartridges out of the box.

Yes, I've been reading up on the various options and they all stike me
as pretty tricky, especially when reading the 1 star reviews.

Yes, but those one star reviews are often from idiots that don't read
the manual or complaints about late delivery.


--
Regards
wasbit

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, I've been reading up on the various options and they all stike me
as pretty tricky, especially when reading the 1 star reviews.

I'd say the decision tree should go something like this:

1. Do you really really need top quality photos and are prepared to pay substantially more per page for it?
- if no, go to 2
- if yes, go to 3

2. Go for a colour laser
- I can recommend Brother for reduced toner chipping shenanigans
- I have the HL-L8260CDW which is excellent and doesn't use toner chips.
I use aftermarket toner at about £30 for a full set which is dirt cheap.
I can't speak for colour rendition of them v OEM as for home printing
I don't care.
- Yes Brother use different toners in different regions (TN-421, TN-431,
TN-441 for mine in different regions) but buy from a reputable
supplier and you'll be fine.


3. Do you want artist grade photos?
- if yes, go for an inkjet with more than 4 inks
(pigment inks are more lightfast than dye inks, important if it's going on
the wall).
- The Canon imageProGRAF range is nice, the Pro-1000 range takes 80ml ink
and there's a third party CISS system
I have a Pro-300 which has 14ml carts and they're too small. I upgraded
from an Epson XP-970 which really doesn't like third party ink.
- budget for expensive special paper (~50p per sheet)

- if you don't need artist grade photos, go for an Epson Ecotank inkjet
- you will likely still need to pay extra for good paper


4. If Q1 = yes and if budget is tight and you don't mind some faff, investigate a CISS system on a cartridge-based inkjet. Useful especially if you need something one of the EcoTank printers won't do.


Negative reviews can give some useful information but I wouldn't pay a huge amount of attention. Many of them are not actually problems with the
product (often with the user or the supplier) - I only tend to skim them for things I might care about.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 15 May 2025 at 11:04:53 BST, Theo wrote:

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, I've been reading up on the various options and they all stike me
as pretty tricky, especially when reading the 1 star reviews.

I'd say the decision tree should go something like this:

1. Do you really really need top quality photos and are prepared to pay substantially more per page for it?
- if no, go to 2
- if yes, go to 3

2. Go for a colour laser
- I can recommend Brother for reduced toner chipping shenanigans
- I have the HL-L8260CDW which is excellent and doesn't use toner chips.
I use aftermarket toner at about £30 for a full set which is dirt cheap.
I can't speak for colour rendition of them v OEM as for home printing
I don't care.
- Yes Brother use different toners in different regions (TN-421, TN-431, TN-441 for mine in different regions) but buy from a reputable
supplier and you'll be fine.

+1 on Brother - I've got a Brother HL-L3230CDW and it works very well - quiet, quick, low power use on standby, good quality printing and I find photos to be quite acceptable even on cheap paper.

And duplex - strongly recommend the OP considers this if likely to print 2-sided.

--
Cheers, Rob, Sheffield UK

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Theo <[email protected]> wrote:

RJH <[email protected]> wrote:

And duplex - strongly recommend the OP considers this if likely to print
2-sided.

That's a good point - I've not seen inkjets which will print double sided, although I assume they exist. You can of course turn the stack of paper over, but inkjet tends to make the paper a bit crinkly which might cause feeder problems. Feed problems (eg feeding two pages when you want
one) can cause the sides to get out of sync, wasting the whole stack.

Theo

Epson Ecotank will do duplex

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RJH <[email protected]> wrote:

And duplex - strongly recommend the OP considers this if likely to print 2-sided.

That's a good point - I've not seen inkjets which will print double sided, although I assume they exist. You can of course turn the stack of paper
over, but inkjet tends to make the paper a bit crinkly which might cause
feeder problems. Feed problems (eg feeding two pages when you want
one) can cause the sides to get out of sync, wasting the whole stack.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 15 May 2025 11:47:55 +0100 (BST)
Theo <[email protected]> wrote:

RJH <[email protected]> wrote:

And duplex - strongly recommend the OP considers this if likely to
print 2-sided.

That's a good point - I've not seen inkjets which will print double
sided, although I assume they exist. You can of course turn the
stack of paper over, but inkjet tends to make the paper a bit crinkly
which might cause feeder problems. Feed problems (eg feeding two
pages when you want one) can cause the sides to get out of sync,
wasting the whole stack.

The last few we've had will do duplex, though it takes a while as it
hangs the paper out for several seconds for the ink to dry before doing
the other side.

This is our current one:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-TS705-PIXMA-Black/dp/B07MM1T12P

It's a bit beefier than a basic domestic printer as we need it to print
on card at 300gsm, there aren't that many fairly cheap printers that
will. Also, they're nearly all multifunction, whereas we need a rear
sheet feeder, which isn't really compatible with a scanner sitting on
top.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 15/05/2025 11:04, Theo wrote:

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, I've been reading up on the various options and they all stike me
as pretty tricky, especially when reading the 1 star reviews.

I'd say the decision tree should go something like this:

1. Do you really really need top quality photos and are prepared to pay substantially more per page for it?
- if no, go to 2
- if yes, go to 3

2. Go for a colour laser
- I can recommend Brother for reduced toner chipping shenanigans
- I have the HL-L8260CDW which is excellent and doesn't use toner chips.
I use aftermarket toner at about £30 for a full set which is dirt cheap.
I can't speak for colour rendition of them v OEM as for home printing
I don't care.
- Yes Brother use different toners in different regions (TN-421, TN-431, TN-441 for mine in different regions) but buy from a reputable
supplier and you'll be fine.

3. Do you want artist grade photos?
- if yes, go for an inkjet with more than 4 inks
(pigment inks are more lightfast than dye inks, important if it's going on
the wall).
- The Canon imageProGRAF range is nice, the Pro-1000 range takes 80ml ink
and there's a third party CISS system
I have a Pro-300 which has 14ml carts and they're too small. I upgraded from an Epson XP-970 which really doesn't like third party ink.
- budget for expensive special paper (~50p per sheet)

- if you don't need artist grade photos, go for an Epson Ecotank inkjet
- you will likely still need to pay extra for good paper

4. If Q1 = yes and if budget is tight and you don't mind some faff, investigate a CISS system on a cartridge-based inkjet. Useful especially if you need something one of the EcoTank printers won't do.

Negative reviews can give some useful information but I wouldn't pay a huge amount of attention. Many of them are not actually problems with the
product (often with the user or the supplier) - I only tend to skim them for things I might care about.

Nice summary.



--
Regards
wasbit

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 15/05/2025 11:04, Theo wrote:

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, I've been reading up on the various options and they all stike me
as pretty tricky, especially when reading the 1 star reviews.

I'd say the decision tree should go something like this:

1. Do you really really need top quality photos and are prepared to pay substantially more per page for it?
- if no, go to 2
- if yes, go to 3

2. Go for a colour laser
- I can recommend Brother for reduced toner chipping shenanigans
- I have the HL-L8260CDW which is excellent and doesn't use toner chips.
I use aftermarket toner at about £30 for a full set which is dirt cheap.
I can't speak for colour rendition of them v OEM as for home printing
I don't care.
- Yes Brother use different toners in different regions (TN-421, TN-431, TN-441 for mine in different regions) but buy from a reputable
supplier and you'll be fine.

3. Do you want artist grade photos?
- if yes, go for an inkjet with more than 4 inks
(pigment inks are more lightfast than dye inks, important if it's going on
the wall).
- The Canon imageProGRAF range is nice, the Pro-1000 range takes 80ml ink
and there's a third party CISS system
I have a Pro-300 which has 14ml carts and they're too small. I upgraded from an Epson XP-970 which really doesn't like third party ink.
- budget for expensive special paper (~50p per sheet)

- if you don't need artist grade photos, go for an Epson Ecotank inkjet
- you will likely still need to pay extra for good paper

4. If Q1 = yes and if budget is tight and you don't mind some faff, investigate a CISS system on a cartridge-based inkjet. Useful especially if you need something one of the EcoTank printers won't do.

Negative reviews can give some useful information but I wouldn't pay a huge amount of attention. Many of them are not actually problems with the
product (often with the user or the supplier) - I only tend to skim them for things I might care about.

Theo

+1 but also consider

5. If the need for quality is only occasional use a print shop / online
photo print service when you need it.

Fundamentally when it comes to knocking out flyers a laser jet is find
on bog standard paper. It will also proof color photos, but for pro
glossy whatsit and colour perfect the printshops can do the flyers and
the photo shops can do the prints

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]d> wrote:

+1 but also consider

5. If the need for quality is only occasional use a print shop / online
photo print service when you need it.

Fundamentally when it comes to knocking out flyers a laser jet is find
on bog standard paper. It will also proof color photos, but for pro
glossy whatsit and colour perfect the printshops can do the flyers and
the photo shops can do the prints

Agreed. Also if they need stapling and folding then a print shop can do it while you're there doing it by hand with a stapler.

However there is a spot where the volume is too much for a pay-per-page printing at your local library/etc (where you might go to print boarding
passes or parcel labels or whatever if you don't have a printer) and too
little to be economic for a bulk commercial printer (who wants a print run
of several hundred flyers or booklets). There is a niche here for DIY
printing especially for a laser with low running costs. The OP would have
to enquire but I think their volume could be in that ballpark.

The 'glossier the print the more you pay' rule applies equally at print
shops as it does for home printing.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

This is great advice, and I may need to come back to it soon.
Meanwhile my neighbour has just thrown out a Brother inkjet, with
scanner because the colour red is not printing.
I just saw some convincing videos showing the use of syringes, used
with isopropyl alcohol and Windex mixture to overcome the problem.

Give it a go. However, inkjets are often sold on the razor blade model -
the printer is dirt cheap but you pay through the nose for the cartridges.
So a 'free' printer may just be a route into dependency on expensive cartridges.

However at this point you've nothing to lose, and you could look at it as a temporary stopgap to get a feel for your use case - eg say you'll spend max £50 on consumables and then reassess your needs. If in that time you decide that this printer is too slow and awkward, or too expensive to run, upgrade
to something better. If everything is acceptable, then stick with it.

There's a good deal to be said for just starting going with what you've got, and then making a purchasing decision once you understand what you actually need later. Applies equally to other kinds of purchases like power tools.

Theo

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 16/05/2025 11:13, Mike Halmarack wrote:
colour to the printers.

This is great advice, and I may need to come back to it soon.
Meanwhile my neighbour has just thrown out a Brother inkjet, with
scanner because the colour red is not printing.
I just saw some convincing videos showing the use of syringes, used
with isopropyl alcohol and Windex mixture to overcome the problem.

It /might/ help. Isopropyl alcohol didn't help with my Epson inkjet and resulted in a lot of staining mess too!

--
Jeff

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 16/05/2025 11:28, Theo wrote:

The Natural Philosopher <[email protected]d> wrote:

+1 but also consider

5. If the need for quality is only occasional use a print shop / online
photo print service when you need it.

Fundamentally when it comes to knocking out flyers a laser jet is find
on bog standard paper. It will also proof color photos, but for pro
glossy whatsit and colour perfect the printshops can do the flyers and
the photo shops can do the prints

Agreed. Also if they need stapling and folding then a print shop can do it while you're there doing it by hand with a stapler.

However there is a spot where the volume is too much for a pay-per-page printing at your local library/etc (where you might go to print boarding passes or parcel labels or whatever if you don't have a printer) and too little to be economic for a bulk commercial printer (who wants a print run
of several hundred flyers or booklets). There is a niche here for DIY printing especially for a laser with low running costs. The OP would have
to enquire but I think their volume could be in that ballpark.

When we needed to do a 200 run of a folded A4 flyer, we simply bought a
laser printer for less than the cost of getting it printed.

Loss leader. The new inks/toners cost more than the whole printer did
when they ran out!

I ditched my A1 inkjet plotter because it was a monstrous bitch to keep
running and took up space.

But it did all the plans for the house I was building so paid for itself
in spades...

The 'glossier the print the more you pay' rule applies equally at print
shops as it does for home printing.

+1.
Glossy paper costs.

Theo

--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 16/05/2025 12:34, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 16/05/2025 11:13, Mike Halmarack wrote:
colour to the printers.

This is great advice, and I may need to come back to it soon.
Meanwhile my neighbour has just thrown out a Brother inkjet, with
scanner because the colour red is not printing.
I just saw some convincing videos showing the use of syringes, used
with isopropyl alcohol and Windex mixture to overcome the problem.

It /might/ help. Isopropyl alcohol didn't help with my Epson inkjet and resulted in a lot of staining mess too!

Water used to work with my old HP plotter

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 16/05/2025 11:13, Mike Halmarack wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 16:42:37 +0100, John Rumm
<[email protected]> wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

This is a deep subject - and much will depend no the eventual workflow.
If the actual volume printing is being done by a print shop etc, then
what you choose may not matter much, since most will take print ready
copy as a PDF.

Many printers these days seem to follow the Gillette model of pricing
(loss leader hardware, expensive consumables, with many building DRM
into their inks/toners to try ans restrict you to OEM consumables). For
Lasers, Brother are one of the few holdouts that don't go too far out of
their way to be obnoxious. (cf stories of Canon multi-function devices
that will not even scan if they are low on ink).

If you do get one that is network connected, make sure it can't reach
the internet. That way you only do a firmware upgrade if you want to do
it, and should not suddenly find it now does less that what you paid for!

Generally inkjet is cheaper to buy, more expensive to run (although note
a full set of toner carts can be several hundred quid on a colour laser
even if they are significantly lower cost per page).

Inject has the edge on top end glossy photographic prints - but colour
lasers are pretty good these days. Laser equal or better on "business
colour" (graphs, charts, colour heading on plain paper etc)

If you want top end colour photo output / print ready proofing, you
could look at "dye-sub" printers.

If you want volume inkjet, look at those that allow the use of
continuous ink feed systems (external tanks of ink linked by tubes to
the print head, rather than teeny cartridges with small volumes of ink
inside). Often available for some Epson inkjets.

You may even find a budget mono laser is adequate - proof colour stuff
on screen, layout etc in black and white on paper, and send PDF in
colour to the printers.

This is great advice, and I may need to come back to it soon.
Meanwhile my neighbour has just thrown out a Brother inkjet, with
scanner because the colour red is not printing.
I just saw some convincing videos showing the use of syringes, used
with isopropyl alcohol and Windex mixture to overcome the problem.

I have a Canon inkjet. Having not used it for a while (its A3 and I
normally use my Samsung A4 laser printer), I cleaned the nozzles
multiple times, even removing the head and soaking it in IPA. Nothing
worked. A couple of months later, I printed to it to see if it had got
worse ... and it worked perfectly. I can only assume that the fresh ink
from the cleaning cycles had eventually dissolved the blockages.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/05/2025 14:09, Theo wrote:

Mike Halmarack <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 11:25:35 +0100, Fredxx <[email protected]d>
wrote:

On 14/05/2025 09:53, Mike Halmarack wrote:

I want to do a newsletter/magazine type periodical for my local
community.
I'd like to print the initial pages myself and I've been trying to
decide on a home printer for the job.
As most of the finished job will go elsewhere for printing/copying
I'm undecided what printer to get for my own use.
It seems that laser printers generally reproduce text well, but are
not too good for photo printing.
At the moment I'm trying to understand that as inkjets output photo
printing well, to what level of quality inkjet printer output text in
comparison with laser printers?

I've found colour laser printers can print a pretty good grey scale and
acceptable.

I wouldn't touch an ink jet. They are expensive to run, very slow and
unreliable.

Choose a printer from the cost of consumables aspect. Whenever I have
needed a printer I look at cheapest first and then check up toner costs. >>> I then keep going until I have a reasonable compromise.

Sounds like a good way of processing the choice.

+1. It can cost somewhere between <1p and 50p a page, so it makes a big difference.

Another fun wheeze is multifunction printers which refuse to scan when they run out of ink. Better to have separate units.

Canon scanner/printers allow you to override this 'feature' by
pressing the stop button for 5 seconds when a low-ink warning appears -

https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/s/article/ART133151

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)