Kenneth, 8X10's are cheaper than the lab. It is 4X6 paper that is the problem. I put ink cost around around 20-30 cents. To keep under the 50 cent threshhold of lab cost on 4X6 reprint, that means the paper needs to be 20 cents or less. About the cheapest I have found for quality paper is 30 cents sheet in quantity. It also seems like the borderless printing uses more ink than I would expect.
Anyway, I have found that as long as you don't have to reprint, 8X10's are about half last cost but 4X6 are as much or more than the lab. Bruce Tuesday, June 3, 2003, 3:29:13 PM, you wrote: KW> I have an Epson 2000P. I've been printing with it for 6 months or so and KW> haven't kept a close tab on the costs but it appears I can do an 8X10 print KW> for around a $1.00/print ink costs and around $0.80/print photo paper costs. KW> I consider this a bargain. KW> Kenneth Waller KW> ----- Original Message ----- KW> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Len, >> >> I never found a cheap source for paper. That was alway the major cost >> for me. The quality of paper needs to be on par with what I get at >> the lab. That is what drove up the cost of the prints for me. >> >> Bruce >> >> Tuesday, June 3, 2003, 11:52:12 AM, you wrote: >> >> LP> If you use the right printer for 4 x 6 prints, you can beat the cost KW> of lab >> LP> prints. Try the HP Photosmart 100, 130, or the most current 4 x 6 KW> printer. >> LP> Great 4 x 6 prints but, remember, it won't print anything larger. I KW> do all >> LP> of my 4 x 6 prints on it and do the big prints on the Epson. >> >> LP> Len >> LP> --- >> >> >> >>I concur. On my Canon, HP, and Epsons, 8X10's would >> >>cost in the $2-$3 >> >>range. That is reasonable as a lab print would cost >> >>about $6.50 each. >> >>I found that 8X10's were cost effective (provided >> >>you don't have to >> >>reprint - color problems, lightness, etc) but 4X6's >> >>are iffy compared >> >>to lab cost. >> >> >> >> > Bruce
