How can I minimize the cost of developing Medium format film?

I just love my old cameras. I am just wondering what are the tricks to minimize the cost of developing medium format film? I would like to have professional quality.

1. I guess the first is to buy expired film? (Which is the best source to get the film, ebay?)
2. I guess I need to develop my own film on my own.
3. I need to scan the negatives with my own scanner.

Which is the best scanner to scan medium format film? Do you use one or you send it away to scan it?
BUT probably the most important question: Is it worth it to develop and scan your own film?

It's worth it because sooner or later you'll end up with a darkroom

Developing you own film is a good and efficient way to save money, and it'll give you more control and teach you a lot.

Buying expired film (better, get expired film for free *) is another one, IDK if it'd be cheaper than buying cheap film.


* : if you have an address for free film, can you share ?

You are posting on a fine line between two sites, apug, and hybridphoto.com. On the film source query, I find most of mine locally from ad shooters who have moved on. B&W MF film it seems has a stronger demand that c-41. I have tried rerolling slit down bulk 70mm (not worth the effort). I find the best deal is to buy it 20 rolls at a time (a brick, in old school film terms) from B&H or Freestyle.

The processing of film at home can easily rival or exceed 'professional lab quality' results. It takes care, and a bit of experience, and following the instructions with any chemistry you purchase.

I will leave the scanning issue to hybridphoto. I have an older Epson that is certainly servicable, but I find scanning a pain; I would rather print the negatives optically.

Welcome to APUG.

Your volume will determine a lot.

If you have the time to do it yourself that will keep cash in your pocket.

For my personal work that's workable. For paying work like weddings it is much more cost effective for me to send it out.

Out of date film if it has been kept well is very workable in most cases, there will be disappointments/surprises on occasion. For personal work that's not a catastrophe, at a wedding though???

As to your scanning workflow, please see DPUG.org, APUG is dedicated to traditional processes, non-digital.

I don't take chances with film. I buy it mostly fresh in quantity. If you're buying a roll at a time, it's often not the cheapest solution. Buying 5 packs is sometimes better or getting quantity discounts. If you want to save money, buy as much as you can right now. The increased silver prices are starting to affect film prices. Store it in your freezer or fridge. If nothing else, buying in quantity will save on shipping. Many large format people who have an appetite for film are hoarding it right now, to hedge against increasing costs for all film or the changing Kodak business practices for 8x10 and ULF film.

You should process it at home. The chemicals will probably cost $1-2 per roll depending on developer choices. You develop the film in a paterson tank/reel; their 3 roll tank will do 2 rolls of 120. Everything except loading it is done in daylight. I figure an hour per batch for loading and developing. With two timers I can do two batches at the same time by staggering them by five minutes.

You said you were looking to be economical, but asked for the best scanner. Perhaps the most revered scanner is a Nikon that just went out of production and costs thousands. Epson v700 is combination of quality and value and it's what I use for 35mm-8x10 film.

Relying on finding expired film is tough. For B&W you might as well buy the house brand from Freestyle, for color you will have to take your chances on finding deals. Developing at home is easy as can be, just takes some focus and being consistant. I print my own as well. I have both color and B&W gear in my darkroom, though I havent printed color in some time. I do process my own E-6 in 35mm, medium format and large format. The only scanning that happens at my house is my finished prints when I feel like posting them here.

I would be inclined to stick with fresh film from a known brand. I've seen suggestions to use the cheap 120 stuff coming from Hong Kong (generally including "lomography Holga" in the title) but TBH I'd rather stick with Ilford. It's not stupidly expensive (I can find most of their mainstream B&W stuff for £3 a roll), it's reliable, and I like to support them as they offer a complete system. There's no point in film if you can't get the chemicals to develop it or the paper to print it, and Ilford still sell the lot.

My two cents.

I would agree that you should buy your own tanks and reels, chemicals and process your own film. Second, idea is find someone who can process your film for you and pay them. I do it for friends here at a lower price then some local labs. I draw the line at printing.
The third, item is buy c-41 B&W film or color film and have a commercial lab process the film only. Then scan your film yourself, if you do not have a darkroom space or a friend with a Darkroom.
I would do a search around here for anyone who can either teach you how to process, do your film for you or lead you to a community darkroom or school.
There is nothing wrong if you need to scan your film either. Darkroom space is a big commitment. I have one but my wife sometimes thinks I need to convert it into a storage space.
Over my dead body!

How much are you shooting? For my purpose, shooting MF verses 35mm does not increase cost. I tend to shoot carefully and have higher percentage of good shots than 35mm. Film doesn't cost that much more either and perhaps represent small percentage of total expense.

I am not sure DIYing film will decrease cost as equipment and chemicals do cost money. All those little stupid stuff costs. The reason I do it myself is because it's fun, convenient (I can see the results few hours later) and have full control of the process.

No comments on scanning part. I don't do it at all except for posting the result online in rare cases.

[QUOTE I have one but my wife sometimes thinks I need to convert it into a storage space.
Over my dead body![/QUOTE]

That can be arranged.

The wife.

You state that you want professional results.

Well, there's only one way to do that...don't use expired film. You never know how it's been stored.

I did all the calculations a while back and found that for small 250mL-500mL tanks, HC110 is by a large margin the cheapest developer to use, and that includes scratch-mixed developers which are replenished. Replenished developers only become as cheap as HC110 if you use large tanks.

if you don't mind standing up ( in the dark ) ..
one of the most inexpensive ways to process 120 film is in a deep tank.
you make 3.5 gallons of developer at once and replenish it.

you buy a bunch of reels and get a few wire coat hangers to dip/dunk your film
its easy and cost effective.

Film is cheaper than you think. Somehow I seem to get more good results with 10, 12 or 15 shots on a roll of medium format film than I get with 36 shots on a roll of 35mm film.

Developing the film yourself is inexpensive, even if you factor in the initial cost of equipment. You do have to waste a bit of film initially, as you learn, but that is where expire film or 35mm can help.

Scanning isn't really for discussing here. But it certainly is doable on a reasonable budget, if you keep your prints small. For good quality though, you need to either spend big, or set up or rent a darkroom for printing.

By the way, a digital camera and a light box can make a quick and easy low quality negative proofer - so digital workflows can coexist with the darkroom:

The cost is really pretty minimal. Lets see; to develop at home you need a tank ($21.99 at B&H for 2 reel, but get the 5 reel or used), film, developer and fix. TMAX 400 @ B&H $17.95 for 5 rolls ($3.39 a roll). A gallon of XTOL is $9.95. That is enough XTOL to develop 50 rolls of film 1+2 single shot. 1 Gallon of fix is around $10, which is enough fix for something like 200 rolls of film.

I have been forced to use inexpensive film on many occasions due to financial resources. It has taught me some valuable lessons:

1. Expired film doesn't always behave consistently. Often you will get larger grain and high base fog. Some like that - I detest it. I want to know what to expect. It makes printing so much easier (or scanning), which means you save money and time at the tail end of the process.
2. Using films like Arista.EDU Ultra is inexpensive at first glance. But with some teething quality problems I ended up shooting two frames of everything, just to make sure I had at least one good frame. That there makes the film twice as expensive already.

The lowest price high quality film is Fuji Acros. A 5-pack of it is around $15 at Freestyle. That's a few dollars less than Kodak TMax 100, which is incredibly similar to Acros.

While the Arista.EDU film has some wonderful features as far as tonality goes, I made the decision to just shoot more carefully instead and spend more money up-front on film, knowing I'd have a quality product where I don't have to wonder how it's going to come out once processed. That realization is the best thing that's ever happened to me.

So to shoot inexpensively, really think twice about whether the shot you just framed is worth the exposure or not. Compose carefully if you can. Developer? They are all pretty inexpensive in the grand scheme of things. None of them are bad, but it makes sense to pick one that has storage longevity that reflects how much film you shoot. Some developers survive storage better than others. HC-110 from Kodak stores exceptionally well, is widely available, and was good enough for people such as Ansel Adams, which means it's good enough for us mortals.

Summary: Choose what you shoot carefully, use fresh quality film, use a developer that's practical for you.

You can reduce the cost by not shooting unnecessarily (i.e. bracketing when you have perfectly good methods available for determine your ideal exposure), and paying attention to what is in the viewfinder every time before you fire the shot. In other words, by shooting more keepers and fewer duds. It's kind of insane, since photography is all about the 2D frame, but IME many, if not most, people do not really look at their frame or pay attention to the way things look when shooting. Learn to relate what you see in the viewfinder to what you will get in the darkroom, and you are well ahead of 90 percent of photographers out there, and you will waste an innumerable amount less film.

With processing, you can do it yourself cheep. With 220 reels, you can fit 4 rolls of 120 into one liter/quart of chemistry. You can even double roll back to back and get 8 in there if you really want.

As for printing, try a used Beseler or Omega to go the cheap route. They turn up on Craigs List commonly for anwhere from $50 to $300. I got my 4x5 Beseler in super condition with a color head and three lenses and three carriers locally for $60 (tho' the 50 lens has fungus...but it's OK 'cause I already had one), and a beautiful Rodenstock 150mm lens as new for an extra $80.

Or if you want a film scanner, DPUG can help you find one, but not APUG.

haring said:

I just love my old cameras. I am just wondering what are the tricks to minimize the cost of developing medium format film? I would like to have professional quality.

Click to expand...

The main cost saving is scanning things yourself. A good scanner will pay itself after about 40-50 rolls.

You could develop yourself if you have the time and inclination. Personally, I cannot be bothered, although I do shoot mainly colour. I'd probably have a different opinion if I was shooting B&W. I get my film done in a pro lab for £4. You can probably reduce that to less than 50p if you do it yourself.

As for expired film? I could probably get expired film for £1-2 instead of £3-4 for fresh but I'd rather have the consistency.

I am all in favor of saving as much money as possible, but when it comes to film I try to buy fresh film to encourage the manufacturers to keep making it. However, I definitely shop around and try to get the best price from retailers.

Also, for E6 and C41 color, the price of processing at Samy's in Santa Barbara simply cannot be beat.

Dead Link Removed

1) use fresh B&W film
2) get a tank for free from someone
3) process as many rolls at a time that fit in a tank
4) don't waste money on a scanner, get a free enlarger from someone

“Film is cheap” was instilled in me in my photojournalism classes. The thought being that if you don’t get the good expression or the ‘money’ sports shot because you were conserving film, the newspaper suffers and so will you.

I’m no longer doing pj but I subscribe to ‘film is cheap’ for a different reason. When I take the time to travel to a shoot, plan and compose the shot, take light readings and make exposures; I have invested some amount of time(sometimes lots of time and gas). The last thing I want to happen is develop my films and find surprises.

There are other ways to save money such as buying in bulk and saving $ on the film and shipping and spreading the costs among several fellow photographers.

Mike

Developing your own film, which is relatively cheap (although with a little upfront investment), will alleviate the cost of decent film--if you chase after expired-film deals, you may wind up wasting time and film and your per-roll cost may be the same.

If you have the space to set up a home darkroom, look for a good used enlarger and print optically. A scanner may be a good expedient if you don't have room or the ability to have a home darkroom; after all, you will still have the negatives (so archive them carefully), and you may be able to rent or borrow a darkroom to do printing of shots that you particularly like. Nothing beats knowing how to do it the traditional way.

I'll leave the scanner recommendations to the other site (full disclosure: I'm looking for one myself).

Process your own film.

Steve

Sirius Glass said:

Process your own film.

Steve

Click to expand...

Plus exprience.

Jeff