BW Develop/Print/Scan

[Monito]

The action is here but the way spook posters here about scanning is certainly not doing the advertising labs and Ilford etc. any favors.

Agreed. Purism is fine, as it will satisfy a narrow segment. However, the way some domineering vocal members here are so anal about analog, as revealed by their signature lines about proctologists and upraised digits, is hardly an attraction for photographers who come here to, you know, like, maybe, learn something about film photography. The chauvinists write things like 'To represent a proper balance digital users are called "crackheads", "have no clue" and "dog turds"'. They tried to run me off the site in my first week here because I dared to explain that fundamentally both digital and analog photography are electronic imaging systems. They thought I might be a new user who didn't know anything about developing or enlarging and when their dirty deed was done they could go back to slapping each other on the back happy their little corner would be smug and pure.

Unfortunately, most who approach this site don't want to stand up to such bullying or have the time for it.

[Since the off-topic continues and I can't beat it, I join it.]

 

[Monito]

Sorry, this is incorrect - from the very top of the page: "APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes."

Those processes and devotees do not exist in a vacuum.

The original poster has a problem with analogue photography that might be solved by impure means.

 

[Aristophanes]

Sorry, this is incorrect - from the very top of the page: "APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes."

I'm not disagreeing with you about the value of discussions about labs and scanning. It just that APUG has decided for very good reasons not to go there. The issue has been revisited many times, and the same decision has been made each time.

And throughout that process, APUG has continued to grow and prosper.

1. Clearly not everyone is "like-minded".

2. APUG has to censor people "not to go there" even if it is clearly linked to advertising revenue that allows analog business to even exist. Think about that for a second.

3. Think about it some more, especially what happens when advertisers are involved and the feedback they may receive.

4. That does not mean that the decision is correct. Again, there is clearly not consensus.

5. Films disappear because people are not buying them. Creating an artificial wedge issue does not help that cause.

I am not saying that open-ended Photoshop discussions are on the table. There's enough places for that. But scanning is now an integral part of lab services and labs drive customers to analog, or at least keep them there. For a majority of film users it is the only way to participate in the larger market.

To cut off that discussion in an analog photo site is self-destructive behavior catering to a narrow few who are fighting a lost cause. I know a ton of young people who would like to mess with film, but they live in a digital world (like APUG advertisers) and need the bridge. DPUG isn't cutting it. They need discussions about labs and scanning and Flickr is not the place either.

What irks me is when a senior member comes into discussions here and starts waving the "shut down the thread" sign like a school marm. If you cannot talk about a lab's broader services, then this really is a darkroom-only forum and the header quoted is deceptive. People should have the guts to come right out and say that "traditional" means darkroom (and Polaroids) instead of being patronizing. A huge number of people interested in film need a better dialogue on APUG including lab scanning services. Putting them into some ghetto for "their kind" is pitiful and frankly, not defensible. This will get back to advertisers because APUG will get a label as lab-unfriendly. People like me will tell advertisers the negative things about them being associated with APUG. The # of APUG subscribers is shockingly small compared to how big the film market used to be.

 

[SuzanneR]

The OP is looking for a lab recomendation. Let's stick to that. APUG would like to avoid long threads about the technical issues of scanning, though we all know that scanning is integral to a professional lab's services. So, if you can recommend a lab, then please offer it here, but these arguments about the aim and purpose of APUG are tedious and tiresome.

 

[CGW]

Sorry, this is incorrect - from the very top of the page: "APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes."

I'm not disagreeing with you about the value of discussions about labs and scanning. It just that APUG has decided for very good reasons not to go there. The issue has been revisited many times, and the same decision has been made each time.

And throughout that process, APUG has continued to grow and prosper.

Who's to stop whoever runs APUG from carrying their own buckets of sand to stick their heads in.

I'm not so sure how this attitude will promote APUG's longevity in view of rapid(and often irrevocable)change in the analog supply chain. Denial isn't much of a strategy.

 

[CGW]

...these arguments about the aim and purpose of APUG are tedious and tiresome.

But probably necessary at some point relative to the issues raised in this thread.

 

[SuzanneR]

...these arguments about the aim and purpose of APUG are tedious and tiresome.

But probably necessary at some point relative to the issues raised in this thread.

I'm not sure it's all that necessary, but if others feel differently, then they can start a thread instead of hijacking this one.

 

[Henry Halifax]

I can only make a decision on a lab if I am informed as to their scanning services in some technical detail. As a younger person my analog photography is entirely tied to scanning services. I can barely remember a time when my photos were not scanned. I am now realizing my old local lab around the corner from my parents was an exception. I think the proprietor lost money doing BW but did it for the love of it and for longtime customers. My intent is to replace that service as best I can within reasonable cost.

Discussions of scanning do not have to degenerate into a slapping contest, but I did not like the idea that my thread would be shut down for discussing scanning services offered by APUG sponsors. Nor do I think it good business to force someone to another website to discuss such matters. If APUG is only about darkrooms and not about lab services including scanning then it should say so, including to its sponsors. I did not mean to touch a nerve, but clearly there is an unresolved issue here. It is not tedious or tiresome to someone new here.

I will try both The Darkroom and a couple of other places and report back. It would be helpful to those of us dependent on lab services to have a forum section dedicated to labs and all their services. This would facilitate commerce with them which I suspect would be good for analog photography overall and good for APUG.

I do not foresee I will ever have a darkroom. I never learned the practice and work/life prohibits such an investment in space and time. Thank-you to the kind gentleman who informed me by PM about how to go about it. I just hope lab services continue to exist going forward and are affordable.

 

[CGW]

I'm not sure it's all that necessary, but if others feel differently, then they can start a thread instead of hijacking this one.

Yeah, right. Those sorts of posts lack the context of this one and just result in a littany of "go to DPUG" answers.

One of these days something will give, I suppose.

 

[Tim Gray]

One of these days something will give, I suppose.

Probably the film manufacturers

I hope not. I love film.

 

[removed account4]

SNIP

Which is totally ridiculous. That's a fact.

please don't pollute this thread with your gripes ...
apug has a mission and it is narrow

if you have a gripe with site policy take it up with the site moderators or owner.
they make and enforce the rules ...

 

[CGW]

SNIP



please don't pollute this thread with your gripes ...
apug has a mission and it is narrow

if you have a gripe with site policy take it up with the site moderators or owner.
they make and enforce the rules ...

Why not discuss it openly? <<background sound of a key turning in the lock on this thread>>

 

[Aristophanes]

SNIP
please don't pollute this thread with your gripes ...
apug has a mission and it is narrow

if you have a gripe with site policy take it up with the site moderators or owner.
they make and enforce the rules ...

APUG has a mission that could conceivably reflect poorly on paying sponsors who advertise their scan services on APUG banner ads only to have subscribers denigrate that service as taboo "pollution". Think about that. I support APUG sponsors with my dollars precisely because they offer scanning.

There are different paths to analog use and they need not be judged as gripes by the self-appointed. From the banner ads it is clear that the advertisers don't draw the same conclusions about these "gray" areas some here apparently do. in other words, there's no consensus. As a result this will repeatedly crop up. It's only contentious if you make it so.

The Moderator already opened the door to discussions of scanning because they are "integral" to lab services. The OP made scan quality details a premise of the request. Hardly "pollution". So let's stop the labeling and just discuss the biz of getting the most out of our film photography using these very valuable lab resources. If they go, most of the rest of analog photography goes too.

 

[removed account4]

i have no problem with discussing this sort of thing openly,
but over the last 5+ years there have been troubles with people
who cram their digit-agenda down people's throats, and it was not too much fun.

if you have a beef with the site's mission statement, take it up with the moderators or sean
rather than complain endlessly in threads about it ( that was the pollution i was talking about ).
it is painfully obvious that we are in the 21st century .. that only a handful of labs make hand-prints,
that there aren't many labs left that will process black and white film, or many places left to buy film ...
but going on and on about how apug's mission statement is wrong and should reflect the whole hybrid/film-scan
aspect of what some practice ... that isn't part of what apug is ... that is what dpug is ...

sorry to sound "harsh" but apug is about film and prints, not about film and scanning ...
i think the labs that advertise here know that ... and i think it is great that they are able to offer
a wide pallet of services to the analog and analog/hybrid community.

 

[Aristophanes]

According to the mission statement APUG is about something I cannot see defined anywhere in the official literature: "traditional".

Virtually all labs I do biz with now are "hybrid" including a major APUG advertiser. So much for tradition.

What really annoys young people is the pejorative "digit-agenda" and "pollution" and "painfully obvious" hyperbole masking as disdain for what virtually every economically viable lab does, which is scan to print. Labs that make it a point to advertise on APUG with bold words like "scan" and "digital". Look! There's one now.

How are they supposed to get business on their core and "integral" services if self-appointed APUG members keep shushing users down about scanning as a normal and unavoidable service? It's a healthy discussion to have because it drives biz to the labs, whereas your talk does the opposite.

It is now functionally impossible to have discussions about lab services without talking their integrated scanning quality. That's not a "digit-agenda" that's the advertising market sustaining APUG.

I sense a very real age gap in this discussion. My "traditional" has always included scanning. DPUG is a ghetto because all the film talk is here and here alone, and when you are dealing with a lab, you discuss the whole chain of service comprehensively because that is the whole point of getting into a working relationship with a lab. I want to know their processing techniques and their papers and if they use a Hasselblad or a Noritsu, the whole works. They inform as a "hybrid" package so the idea that some APUG busybody slices the debate over a few keywords is beyond trivial, it's self-destructive to the business I'd like to give the advertisers.

i have no problem with discussing this sort of thing openly,
but over the last 5+ years there have been troubles with people
who cram their digit-agenda down people's throats, and it was not too much fun.

if you have a beef with the site's mission statement, take it up with the moderators or sean
rather than complain endlessly in threads about it ( that was the pollution i was talking about ).
it is painfully obvious that we are in the 21st century .. that only a handful of labs make hand-prints,
that there aren't many labs left that will process black and white film, or many places left to buy film ...
but going on and on about how apug's mission statement is wrong and should reflect the whole hybrid/film-scan
aspect of what some practice ... that isn't part of what apug is ... that is what dpug is ...

sorry to sound "harsh" but apug is about film and prints, not about film and scanning ...
i think the labs that advertise here know that ... and i think it is great that they are able to offer
a wide pallet of services to the analog and analog/hybrid community.

 

[Tim Gray]

I sense a very real age gap in this discussion. My "traditional" has always included scanning. DPUG is a ghetto because all the film talk is here and here alone, and when you are dealing with a lab, you discuss the whole chain of service comprehensively because that is the whole point of getting into a working relationship with a lab. I want to know their processing techniques and their papers and if they use a Hasselblad or a Noritsu, the whole works. They inform as a "hybrid" package so the idea that some APUG busybody slices the debate over a few keywords is beyond trivial, it's self-destructive to the business I'd like to give the advertisers.

I've harped on this in the past. To extend the above points, I'd like to point out the 'many digital sites' out there that users are usually directed to DO NOT have the wealth of film experience that this site does. When I'm interested in talking about scanning techniques or how film dyes interact with scanner light spectra, this is the audience I want to interacts with. And that's because APUG is where the film experts are. (Largeformatphotography.info isn't too bad either.) Other sites are poor at best in my experience.

 

[removed account4]

aristophanes --

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[CGW]

i have no problem with discussing this sort of thing openly,
but over the last 5+ years there have been troubles with people
who cram their digit-agenda down people's throats, and it was not too much fun.

if you have a beef with the site's mission statement, take it up with the moderators or sean
rather than complain endlessly in threads about it ( that was the pollution i was talking about ).
it is painfully obvious that we are in the 21st century .. that only a handful of labs make hand-prints,
that there aren't many labs left that will process black and white film, or many places left to buy film ...
but going on and on about how apug's mission statement is wrong and should reflect the whole hybrid/film-scan
aspect of what some practice ... that isn't part of what apug is ... that is what dpug is ...

sorry to sound "harsh" but apug is about film and prints, not about film and scanning ...
i think the labs that advertise here know that ... and i think it is great that they are able to offer
a wide pallet of services to the analog and analog/hybrid community.

Sorry but I've yet to see any digital blunt force trauma delivered or suffered here.

Unless its "mission" involves near-term irrelevancy, a bit of flexibility on the scanning issue seems advisable. Again, the irony of a website devoted to analog process full of posted scanned images amounts to a 700lb gorilla APUG blithefully ignores.

 

[Henry Halifax]

By jumping in and attempting to shut down a discussion about lab scanning as part of a suite of services, APUG comes across as being anti-Lab.

I doubt that is healthy for the community and photographic film industry for APUG to cleanse discussions about commercial lab scanning in the attempt to enforce some vision of analog purity.

I've received some good advice here regardless, but I wish the discussion of lab services could have its own place on APUG. That would be very helpful. I was surprised to see that missing and made me wonder if this site was exclusively about darkroom hobbyists to the exclusion of lab customers like myself.

 

[jeffreyg]

It seems that scanning falls into the "gray" area and those issues are directed to DPUG but perhaps a new forum could be added to APUG such as Lab Relations or something on that order that would address lab issues for those who use analog equipment but do not have access to a darkroom or desire to do their own processing and/or printing. This site gets more activity so it might provide more timely information for someone like Henry.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[SuzanneR]

This thread has not been closed, but I'm tempted, not because I'm anti lab, because we seem to be beating a dead horse in this thread, and have gone well past the OP, which, btw, is a tall order IMNSHO, after all, custom work for cheap is hard to find.

I don't think you can accuse APUG as being anti-lab, but the focus here is on traditional analog processes. Processes that people engage in by hand for the most part. Yes, scanning is important for all of us, so a measure of tolerance regarding scanning (I don't think it hurts the site if people comment on whether a lab is good at scanning, and their prices or some basic information about preparing a scan so someone can share their work in the gallery) is tolerated here. We don't want long technical discussions about scanning for digital printing output. There are plenty of other places to discuss that including out sister site, DPUG.

 

[removed account4]

hi henry

in case you need a longer list of labs -

the darkroom,
praus
dr5
ilford
dalmationlabs
elevator
dwaynes
bluemoon camera and machine
cox b&w lab
mv labs

are just a few,
they all will process film
and if you ask, they will all probably provide you with a disk ...
labs aren't cheap ...

if you need a longer list just google "black and white photo lab"
and you will find them ...



i'm not sure how answering your question or questions about labs
makes apug anti lab ?

others jumped in to suggest that there should be a hybrid area here where the digital end
of analog photography is discussed,
i also posted a link to the hybrid group here in the groups area ...

in case you missed it:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

i'm not quite sure what any that has to do with your question about labs

 

[Henry Halifax]

This thread has not been closed, but I'm tempted, not because I'm anti lab, because we seem to be beating a dead horse in this thread, and have gone well past the OP, which, btw, is a tall order IMNSHO, after all, custom work for cheap is hard to find.

I never said custom work or cheap, so please do not put words into my mouth. I used the word affordable and I presume most of my negatives have been machine processed (at least I think they were). I have no problem with that.

As I write this the banner ad for APUG says Film Developing $10 CD, Negs, Scans, Web Upload and More from The Darkroom. They do this for black and white as well as color. This is what caught my eye and drew me to APUG.

If I want to do business with this company I would like feedback on the entirety of their services similar to the comfort I felt with my local lab. It's important to know that how they process will impact how they print and scan. I spoke with The Darkroom and they said they are all related. I was hoping to hear from APUG users about their suite of services before I commit. What I hear from APUG is that some discussion of the lab's services are OK, but other are only tolerated. It is bizarre to only accommodate a discussion of part of an advertiser's integral services and to limit discussion around it. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I don't think you can accuse APUG as being anti-lab, but the focus here is on traditional analog processes. Processes that people engage in by hand for the most part. Yes, scanning is important for all of us, so a measure of tolerance regarding scanning (I don't think it hurts the site if people comment on whether a lab is good at scanning, and their prices or some basic information about preparing a scan so someone can share their work in the gallery) is tolerated here. We don't want long technical discussions about scanning for digital printing output. There are plenty of other places to discuss that including out sister site, DPUG.

If it is supposed to be processing and printing by hand, is that an official APUG stance? I cannot find a reference for that. That's great for the hobbyist with time and space but I though APUG had a broader vision. I came here looking for insights into third party labs.

I may be misunderstanding the whole analog purity issue, but if APUG advertisers scan as part of their core services, is that not something that should be embraced by APUG instead of simply being tolerated?

No one had a long technical discussion because before we even got there a non-moderator came in to tell us the thread may get shut down. Now I am inclined not to use the advertiser's services and inform them that APUG has a disconnect between their message on the forum and their tolerance of the advertiser's processes. Apparently the advertiser is not analog enough for discussion on APUG.

I probably have $500 backlog worth of film to get developed, printed, and scanned in a declining film environment. You would think I would get help with that effort and bring that money to a sponsoring lab, but instead there is a barrier.

I just don't get it. It's like the darkroom door won't open and the lights are broken.

Anyway, thanks to all. The search continues. I will probably try a few places out with some test rolls.

 

[CGW]

This thread has not been closed, but I'm tempted, not because I'm anti lab, because we seem to be beating a dead horse in this thread, and have gone well past the OP, which, btw, is a tall order IMNSHO, after all, custom work for cheap is hard to find.

I don't think you can accuse APUG as being anti-lab, but the focus here is on traditional analog processes. Processes that people engage in by hand for the most part. Yes, scanning is important for all of us, so a measure of tolerance regarding scanning (I don't think it hurts the site if people comment on whether a lab is good at scanning, and their prices or some basic information about preparing a scan so someone can share their work in the gallery) is tolerated here. We don't want long technical discussions about scanning for digital printing output. There are plenty of other places to discuss that including out sister site, DPUG.

Have you actually looked at DPUG?

 

[Tim Gray]

This thread has not been closed, but I'm tempted, not because I'm anti lab, because we seem to be beating a dead horse in this thread, and have gone well past the OP, which, btw, is a tall order IMNSHO, after all, custom work for cheap is hard to find.

[snip]

There are plenty of other places to discuss that including out sister site, DPUG.

I just want to point out two things:

1) It's not really a dead horse if a significant part of the APUG community keeps bringing it up. It is an... unaddressed horse.

2) There really aren't plenty of places. DPUG is not it. There are plenty of websites that discuss printing digital files with ink jets (and other kinds of printers). THERE ARE NOT PLENTY OF SITES WHICH DISCUSS SCANNING FILM. And the ones that do for the most part are very low information, with the sort of questions like "How do I digitize my slides?" Nothing sophisticated. Nothing talking about if and how the new Portra 400 is actually easier to scan. And why. Nothing talking about if Ektar actually does have a blue cast in the shadows when scanning, or if it's due to scanning techniques (something which a wet printing comparison would shed some light on). The only site I've found that has some relevance to this is the large format photography forum. So, the next time you or any other APUG moderators/users say, "There are plenty of other places to discuss that," maybe try to come up with some actual good suggestions for those other places. DPUG really isn't it. And if you can't come up with any suggestions (nothing wrong with that, I can't either) then maybe "There are plenty of other places to discuss that" isn't a valid response and you should just stick with "We don't discuss that here. Sorry we can't direct you to a place that does."