Since 2009 I have used Custom Built Calendars to create my calendars, whom I have found to best meet my needs.  This is both a plug for them and some advice for getting the most out of their service.

My major criteria for choosing them are:

1. Photographic reproduction quality.  The photographic reproduction is very good.  The quantities I get pretty much dictate that digital printing methods will be used, which does have some limitations.   A true photographic reproduction service will yield better quality prints, but not at a feasible unit cost.  Compared to other services using similar technology, the quality is excellent.  I don’t know that I’ll ever get to a quantity that justifies offset printing, but I’d love to try it.
   

1. Professional appearance. 

   

   The available templates have a professional look and feel.  I’m not into cute, and most sites offer mostly cute.  These have the look and feel of a calendar you might buy, not something thrown together at home.  You can also create your own designs from scratch, which I did for 2011 to accommodate wide aspect pictures.  For the monthly bottoms I use the template with the most calendar space, since most folks like to use them and write on them (not just look at them).  Other templates have room for logos and/or text at the bottom.
   

1. Online templates and tools.  The online build program is excellent.  Intuitive and it works great.  I love the ability to custom specify holidays and that it includes seasons, election day, and such.
   

1. Cost.  Most popular sites do not offer quantity discounts, which eliminates them up front.  $20 each may be fine for 1 or 2, but not for 50, 100, or more at a time.  Custom Built Calendar’s quantities start at 25, so it is not the place to go if you’re looking for just a few.   Likewise, if you’re in the 1000’s there may be other competitive printers, but for the in-between quantities I make, they’re the best I’ve found.
   

1. Service.  Their service is excellent.  Every year they deliver on time as promised.  The one year I was not 100% happy with the way they turned out my order was reproduced without question or cost, even though I would have been OK accepting them as they were (lots of folks got calendars they wouldn’t have otherwise received.)
   

A few things I’ve learned to get the best quality:

1. Use the extra heavy paper.  The regular “Premium” paper I used the first year curled consistently after July or so.  The extra heavy paper has been great and also gives it a more professional look and feel.  All my calendars have been the larger size and it may be less of an issue on the standard 8.5 x 11, but I haven’t tried that size.
   

1. Until 2012 I was not willing to pay the extra cost of the environmental paper; however the incremental cost is now negligible, so I now use “Extra Heavy Environmental” paper.  There is no noticeable difference in quality.
   

1. The paper trimming process is not exact, which can affect how borders appear.  The top borders on the printed 2010 calendars were noticeably narrower

   

   than the nominal 3/4 inch border, to the point that some hanging holes extended into the pictures.  They reprinted the whole order without question, and the 2nd batch was much better, if not 100% consistently on.  For many this variability may be fine, but for perfectionists like me I’d stick with full bleed, or use borders where it will not be noticeable.  The wide top and bottom custom borders on the 2011 calendars were fine in this regard (see example below).
   

1. Typically I do a little adjusting of the photos in iPhoto.  Not too much, and mostly to to compensate for the difference between printing and viewing on a computer.  Of course, this is highly dependent on the monitor, so take this with a grain of salt--I have used both an iMac and MacBook and will also preview the calendar on my work computer for comparison.  If I’m not pretty sure that some adjustment is needed, I’ll wait to see the proof first.  In general, I find that colors appear slightly faded and photos slightly lighter when printed, compared to my monitors.
   

2. Bumping up the saturation on some photos can help retain a more vibrant look.

   

   
   

3. Bumping up the dark level helps many photos, and especially lighter ones.
   

4. Softening pictures with wide uniform sky can limit the exacerbation of digital effects.  Gray clouds with hints of pink seem to be the worst.  Sharpness is not your friend here.  This photograph did not reproduce particularly well, at least to my standards.
   

1. You can sometimes see minor printing artifacts if you look closely, particularly on wide expanses of uniform sky or water (again).  No one

   

   else may notice these, and I understand the limitations of the technology dictated by quantity and cost.  Unfortunately the types of pictures I like to take and share are not always the best in this regard.  But you may want to consider this when selecting photographs.  This photograph has noticeable digital printer artifacts (to me) in the sky.  But from a few feet away, fine!  Busier photos have no detectable printing artifacts.
   

MoskeyBasin.com   

(C) Copyright 2011 John Ingersoll, all rights reserved.