Completely Frustrated with Film Processing--Please Help

[FilmOnly]

I am on the brink of selling all of my beloved film gear and switching to the "d" word. After years of searching for a suitable processing solution, I remain perplexed and dismayed. It all "came to a head" yesterday, after Target's film developing machine ruined a roll of 36--giving all of my exposures a strange (and awful) sky blue tint. They refunded my money, but this marked the latest of a long string of problems.

I have tried mailing my film to a "better" (and expensive) photo lab, Specialty Color Services in CA. After a few good rolls, they sent one back with some specs and/or small scratches on it. I mentioned this in my notes, and ended up getting a roll back with two scratches through it from about exposure 29 onward. I was so deflated I did not even bother complaining. Prior to this, I used an upscale camera shop's photo lab (Penn Camera). They never made any long scratches on my work, but I did have a few specs here and there (which they reprinted for me). They also charged a tad more than Specialty, and are about an hour drive from my home. I live in a rural area.

I am tired of all of this. I want careful and painstaking work to be preserved and respected in processing. I bought my wife a little Nikon P60. She printed 72 photos yesterday (without using any crazy post production software), and they are scratch-free and look pretty good. If she had printed 100 or more, it would have cost less than two rolls of 36.

I feel like I have tried everything, with the exception doing my own developing and printing. I have not tried this because I do not want to breathe in chemicals--or have to worry about disposing them, either. I would appreaciate any advice, as I am on the brink of choosing a d*****l kit today and calling KEH, et. al. tomorrow.

 

[AgX]

You should bother processing yourself.

Concerning vapour of chemicals: you should be able to design your lab with a decent ventilation taking off any vapours at their place of origin. Furthermore there are low-odor kits on the market.

Concerning disposal: this has been discussed here over and over again; there should be an option siuted for whereever you are situated.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Like AgX said process yourself. Digital is fine, but I still like doing film better in the long run!

Jeff

 

[removed account4]

are you shooting color or b/w ?
john

 

[Christopher Walrath]

It costs very little to get started. You could process your own film for under $175 I'm sure with some super shopping. Under $200 to be sure. Printing is not much more. Except for the enlarger. I was lucky and found my Fujimoto Lucky 60M on fleabay about four years ago for $50.00 including s/h.

Don't leave your precious work in someone else's hands a moment longer.

 

[Anscojohn]

[I am tired of all of this. I want careful and painstaking work to be preserved and respected in processing.
*********

To be as sure as possible your careful and painstaking work is preserved, it should be photographed with black and white film; then processed using archival technique on black and white paper.
No other approach has yet to prove it's long term existence.

 

[FilmOnly]

I very much appreciate the replies, as I am somewhat down right now. To answer the above question: I shoot both color and b&w print film. I do not shoot slide film. I would say that I shoot about 60% color and 40% b&w. As far as b&w film is concerned, I actually prefer Kodak 400 CN over traditional b&w film. I like its sharpness (although the grays are better in trad b&w film).

I am considering your opinions about developing and printing at home, but I also have to consider the amount of time and effort involved. I have other responsibilities that I must figure into any possible scenario.

 

[keithwms]

May St. Ansel be with you in this moment of weakness.

Are you doing 35mm only? The reason I ask is, the value of getting 35mm processed professionally isn't worth it for some people... in my opinion. Ultimately you have to run the numbers yourself and compute how much you pay per roll and how much a roll is worth i.e. how much you'd typically pay to have those shots printed. For me, the math just doesn't work out at all for colour 35mm, I am afraid. The only way it makes any sense at all is if I develop the rolls myself.... which I do, except for E6. The math also indicated to me that medium format is the way to go... because I shoot very little (maybe a roll per week on average) and tend to want to print a fair portion of those shots. But everybody has to run their own numbers.

Another thing, why not seek out an APUG member nearby and chances are he/she may also be interested in processing.

If you are shooting a lot of colour 35mm and are unwilling to pay for professional processing or do it yourself then, sure, why not use a digital. Maybe you could explore the hybrid workflow for a while. You might also consider forsaking 35mm for a while and trying out medium format. I mean, just go nuts, shake things up a bit, get yourself out of the rut and find enjoyment in the process.

P.S. if you like bw400cn then you will love xp2 super. The kodak was my first chromogenic and I liked it, but after xp2....

 

[FilmOnly]

Yes, I shoot 35mm film. I have thought about medium format, but have wanted to avoid getting started down another road, so to speak.

 

[dpurdy]

I would say that film isn't for everyone. Digital might be what works for you. There are those who love film and the process and that is why they are photographers. If the option is digital or something other than photography, I choose something else. If digital gives you what you need then do it. You can always change your mind later.

 

[bdial]

Unless you shoot quite a lot, it would be difficult to do your own C-41 color processing and have it pay in terms of simple costs. If you don't have some experience in processing your own film, you will also have the expense and perhaps frustration of your learning curve.
Probably not a good way to start out.
I think Keith has a good idea, if you don't mind saying where you live, other members may be able to make recommendations of reliable labs that can do your film without screwing it up, and/or assist you directly in processing it.
If you have some interest in doing your own, conventional B&W films require less of a learning curve, and the chemistry is longer-lived than color, so you can do your own on a small scale econimically and control the quality.

 

[FilmOnly]

I see above the mention of paying for "professional" processing. In the years I have been doing this, I have yet to find anything that actually meets the definition of "professional" processing. I have tried using labs far and wide from east to west. One fellow in Colorado promised great results with his exclusively "optical" equipment, and returned to me photos that had a white burn-like thing along the bottom edge of the frame. It almost seems (at least to me) that "perfect" or "clean" film processing is impossible. I am tired of specks and spots in my skies, out-of-whack colors (as was the case yesterday), and scratches across my prints.

 

[jglass]

maybe, maybe not

Digital may very well be for you if you are very snaphappy/prolific and like to see a whole lot of your snaps printed and aren't really into film...

BUT... have you ever done digital? If you are at all exacting or particular, with your photography, you are in for big learning curve and an even bigger spending curve. That was my experience with digital at least and it has given me such a feeling of satisfaction to get off that merry go round and just worry about what film to buy.

But yes, give it a try if you're this frustrated. My advice is to keep a film camera around and/or buy digital that is lens compatible in case you want to shoot a roll now and then. And also please keep buying film anyway!

 

[Chan Tran]

When target just switched from full wet process to half that is they used to print on RA4 paper and process them even the prints were digitally printed. When they swiched to ink jet printer for the print side they also changed to a new C41 processor that is designed for low volume processing. When they first got the machine the result were great, but after a couple of months they got all kinds of problems. I think we, film users, are in a relatively hopeless situation.

 

[mopar_guy]

I would urge you to think twice before selling your film gear. If you would ever want to get back to film, it would almost certainly cost you more than you get out of it now. Sometimes I have gone long periods without using one of my cameras but I always come back to them. To paraphrase Charlton Heston; You can have my OM-4T when you take it from my cold, dead hand!
Dave

 

[FilmOnly]

I like the above suggestion...and I have taken Keith's point into consideration. I tend to be reluctant to divulge my location, but I will assume good intentions here (as my experiences on this forum have been good), and state that I reside in northwestern Virginia. I am within a somewhat reasonable driving distance from Charlottesville (Keith's location, I believe). I would be shocked to find that there is a scratch-free, hassle-free lab in this general vicinity, as I believe I have tried everywhere.

 

[Tim Gray]

Try a different lab I send my color negs to photoworkssf.com. They send out free mailers for you to send your film to them. Developing is $5/roll, usable scans are another $4/roll. They do 120 too. If you send them 10 rolls, shipping back is free, otherwise its $5. Everything is always well packaged, and they cut the negatives to your spec and sleeve them too. I've not had any scratches. I use the small scan for 4x6 prints and scan larger files at home if I want a big print.

All the B&W is done by me in the bathroom. For not too much money or hassle I might add.

I'm not saying to send your film to the same place I do, but find a place that is recommended by others and just mail your film out. I should say that I used to get stuff developed locally but gave up. There is a good lab in philly, but it's about 25 mins from where I live and only open 9-5 during the week, which means I have to go there over lunch twice to drop off/pick up my film. Mailing out is a lot more convenient for me.

 

[elekm]

I've been using "Dan's Camera City" in Allentown, Pa., as my mail-order processor. I've always been pleased with their results. They're cost a bit more than the others, but they seem to keep very tight control over quality.

However, you should also realize that film, processing and printing is an imperfect process. You might get the occasional dust spot, and you just have to live with it. But some of what you describe might sound like sloppiness.

I would put Target, CVS, Wal-Mart, Costco and others into the bargain basement category of film processing and would keep my expectations as low as possible. Ritz Camera is above that, but only slightly.

For me, I've been very pleased with Dan's (you can get free film mailers sent to you). I would send them a roll and see if they meet your expectations.

Regarding digital, maybe it might be what you want. Of course, then you'll have the problem of getting prints made, because most prints are pumped out on what I would consider to be only average equipment.

For best results, print at home and only those that you want. Even so, the cost can be considerable in terms of software, printer and ink. Particularly ink. And if you'll be doing a lot of home printing, you should calibrate your monitor. On the plus side, you get total control over the results.

 

[FilmOnly]

Chan Tran seems to have summed up the situation fairly well in using the term, "hopeless." I have this feeling. I am still going over your suggestions, though.

 

[Chan Tran]

The printing side isn't too much of a problem. One can go the hybrid route oneself, scan then print on the inkjet or dyesub. One can set up enlarger and darkroom using one shot chemistry. Processing of the film is a bigger problem. It's very difficult to process C41 at home with good consitency and it's much more expensive as you have to use the one shot solution.
I am thinking of buying the same processor that Target is using as it's small, requires no water hookup and can run on 120V household power. I think at one point these machines will be on the used market cheap as most of the labs like Target will eventually get out the business of processing film altogether. The problem is still that even the machine is designed for low volume processing it still requires a minimum of 6 rolls per day to keep the process stable. I am still thinking of a solution.............

 

[Tim Gray]

What processor does Target use? I'd be interested to know.

I'd have a go at developing C41 at home, but finding a source of the proper chemicals in manageable sizes is next to impossible it seems. By proper chemicals, I mean liquid kits with separate bleach and fix.

 

[Anscojohn]

[
I am considering your opinions about developing and printing at home, but I also have to consider the amount of time and effort involved. I have other responsibilities that I must figure into any possible scenario.[/QUOTE]
******
Yes; these concerns are valid. But I suspect your expectations are to bring gourmet cuisine home from the deli; and to expect the meal to last forever.
***********************
Consider that the most important part of your striving is the matrix of the photographic negative. You can perfectly process your own roll of negatives in the amount of time it took you to ferry your film to Target. You can do your archival printing in one or two weekend sessions a year. Do not let your downheartedness deter you from proper alternatives--even with your busy lifestyle and high expectations. It is an ineluctable fact that if you truly wish to ensure your artistry to be available to your great grandchildren's generation, you must work in archivally processed and stored black and white paper. Perhaps, though; you are interested only in present gratification of your highest strivings--not the satisfaction of others yet to come. In that case, take up digithell. >)

That

 

[keithwms]

I like the above suggestion...and I have taken Keith's point into consideration. I tend to be reluctant to divulge my location, but I will assume good intentions here (as my experiences on this forum have been good), and state that I reside in northwestern Virginia. I am within a somewhat reasonable driving distance from Charlottesville (Keith's location, I believe). I would be shocked to find that there is a scratch-free, hassle-free lab in this general vicinity, as I believe I have tried everywhere.

Actually, there is an excellent pro lab in C'ville, Stubblefield photo. They do fantastic work at good prices. They do trad processing from 35mm through 8x10, b&w E6 and c41 (although N.b. I think the only do c41 to 4x5"). They also do high end drum scanning as well as 'normal' scanning, and output by various means.

If you want to drop down and try c41 yourself, hey, no big deal just say when. I have various canisters and reels etc that you can have. For at-home 35mm c41 and b&w, you don't need a darkroom, you just need a changing bag.

 

[hrst]

Processing is easy!

I would encourage you to do the processing by yourself. C-41 processing is very quick, it takes 20 minutes and you have your film drying. The chemicals are almost odorless and disposal is not a problem. With $50, you will get a kit that processes over 50 films. Scratch- and even dust-free, if you want. It's just up to you then---It's a lot easier to scratch your film by yourself and then learn how not to do it, than to try out dozens of labs to see how they always scratch it and never learn.

RA4 prints are also very easy to make. Of course it takes some time (half an hour for a print if you color correct every print and make some test exposures) but the quality is stunning and RA-4 paper is unbelievably cheap (see: http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk/kodak-supra-endura-79-c.asp ).

With digital, you have dust in your sensor and it needs special cleaning every now and then. With film, you have always a clean frame, if your processing is ok. You see, digital also has it's own problems, just like film has it's own. It takes some time to first notice the problems, and then more time to get rid of them. I'm now very satisfied in film. Probably I would be somewhat satisfied in digital, too, if I took the same time with it. But it is different.

I think that the satisfaction in anything is a property of a person himself more than the equipment. I mean the ability to solve the incoming problems and the ability to make also some trade-offs. For example, I can make a trade-off that I take 15 stop dynamic range instead of 8 stop dynamic range but as a trade-off, I get a small scratch every now and then.

Best luck to you!

 

[Mike1234]

Shoot double of everything and process one roll at a time... and that's even if you process the film yourself.