Hi All, I'd like to get some opinions on printers that you all use for printing your photographs. I've done a lot of research but I'm worse than a kid in a candy store and can't make up my mind. The opinions of people on this forum I respect so I'd like to hear them. Here's what I'm looking at: 1. Epson. I'm considering the R1800 or maybe even the 2200. Don't really see the need to spend the extra on the 2400. I like the fact that they're pigment based inks and archival quality for the prints. I also like the fact that I could print up to 13x19. Clogging print heads bothers me as I don't know that I would print daily (at least at this point). Cost per print isn't necessarily easy to determine. 2. Kodak. I'm considering the 1400 dye-sub printer. Primarily the reason is that they seem to output the most photograph-like looking prints. The print longevity is good as well. I realize the max size of output is 8x10 but then I would be using this printer strictly for business (printing portraits in house). I could then always send out any larger prints I wanted for myself. Cost per print is very easy to determine. 3. HP. Today I found info on the HP8750. It looks promising provided you use appropriate paper. It seems to be archival as well. I believe it also has the max print size of 13x19. I have an older HP and bought it because the ink cartridges contain heads so they're replaced new each time a new cartridge is added so the clogging is minimized. From what I've read, even though they use a 3-color ink cartridge, the inks are used up in a fairly even manner (somehow) so you typically don't have to discard the entire cartridge because one ink is used up. The primary purpose of the printer is to print portraits for clients, my assumption is typically not larger than 8x10. I already have a laser printer and numerous inkjets for other household printing. Going with dye-sub isn't an issue for larger prints as I could send larger ones to a lab for printing. So there's my dilemma. My biggest concern is print quality. I also think clients may misconstrue inkjet prints as being inferior to the photos they normally receive from school portrait packages. Are the new inkjets capable of producing the same kind of quality as what most people consider a photograph? Please share your experiences. Thanks!