Canon - imagePROGRAF PRO-4100S

Both are great printers. I'm partial to Canon only because I own one (Canon 4100). But I do get the impression that Canon heads don't clog as frequently as Epson's and that the head replacement is easier on Canons. Otherwise both are probably similar maintenance/consumables cost: [https://www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html](https://www.redrivercatalog.com/rr/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html)

I run a Canon Pro 1000 and 4100 and they are superior machines to any Epson hands down. I’ve had them both for 5 years now and just replaced the print heads. I was able to find them directly from Japan for $500 Canadian which is a great deal for me.

I've been working at a print shop the past couple months, I may have some useful insights. Its a small family business and the guys that run it don't really know about making good photo prints, they just do drugstore quality for photo printing (they mostly print documents, blueprints, posters etc.). They got super stoked when I showed them the Canon Pro-4100s we have can do much better than the G3270 they've been using. We may end up getting a Pro-1100 because I was able to show them the difference between drugstore quality and legit good quality prints. Anyways in my process of experimentation, I learned there are a ton of settings to play with that impact color accuracy and overall print quality. Its fun to experiment with different papers and settings to get a print you're happy with. You can also use soft-proofing which shows you a preview of how your print will turn out on the paper you selected, with the settings you selected. There's a lot of artistry and technical know-how that goes into making great prints. I'm thinking about getting a colorimeter to measure printer performance and develop ICC profiles to maximize color accuracy. Based on the fact that you develop/scan all your own film, you might really enjoy the creative and technical aspects of printing your own photos. A decent photo printer could be a really fun addition to your process, and it would let you control every detail yourself from the click of the shutter to the final product. IMO, thats the real reason to own your own photo printer. Its not about cost, although if you print a lot it could be cheaper. Its about creative control.

I couldn't really tell you about the longevity of dye inks. In the shop, the three printers we have that can do photos are the Canon Pro-4100s (8 channel pigment ink), an HP DesignJet T520 (4 channel dye) and a Canon G3270 (4 channel dye). The photos out of the 4100s look significantly better, especially when there are deep blacks or saturated colors. And that's before even messing with ICC profiles or other advanced settings. If I were you, I'd go with a printer that uses pigment based inks if your budget allows. As far as I know, dye inks are not used for any professional gallery-quality photo printing. Its more than just being archival quality. Pigments have better properties than dyes when it comes to color reproduction.

Look into the Canon Image Prograf 4000 series. They are aqueous, about 5 grand, the quality is amazing.

Indeed, I missed the casual use bit, I use one professionally with hahnemuhle archival Paper its superb and i suck up the cost of the odd auto cleaning cycles

I had a similar canon. Just make sure you print regularly. The print heads dry out fairly fast if you don’t. I sold mine cause replacing the heads got really annoying.

Canon imagePROGRAF or Epson Sure Color photo printers are the best you can get for home use. They are expensive but will be noticeably better than any normal 4-5 color printer.