Is Color Developing Worth It?

MattKing said:

There is no hardener in most Rapid fixers that I am aware of - unless you elect to add it.

Click to expand...

Bronson Dugnutt said:

Exception: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...058452_professional_kodafix_1qt_solution.html

{Edited by Matt King, to make it easier to figure out}

Click to expand...

That particular Rapid Fixer is an anomaly in the world of Rapid Fixers.

Kodak Rapid Fixer, Kodak C41 Fixer, Ilford Rapid Fixer and Ilford Hypam are the Rapid Fixers that I encounter most, and I believe are used most in the markets that I am familiar with.

They are all non-hardening, unless you elect to add hardener (to the ones compatible with hardener - Ilford Rapid Fixer is not). There are other Rapid Fixers that come from other suppliers that are also quite popular, and are, as far as I am aware also non-hardening.
Most importantly though, it is not necessary to have hardener in your Rapid Fixer, unless you choose to do so.

If you shoot enough and can invest in some good equipment I think it is definitely worth it.

Trying to make a 1 liter press kit last for 2 years to save some money, not worth it IMO.

I send out my C41 processing.
When I had my lab a few years ago, there was another lab in competition with me online.
So I decided to send them a colour roll that I shot and see how the customer experience was.
They emailed me that they had received my film, and the next day I received the uploaded images and the following day I received my negatives back with a money off coupon for next development.

In all it was a very good customer experience, great communication from the lab, the negs were clean and sleeved and looked correct.

The uploaded images were very good, colour and density were good and what I expected, if I had developed them in my own lab.

So when I retired I decided that the previous competition is now my go to lab for C41 developing. Recently I had 4x 35mm film developed and scanned, mid resolution, digital upload images, negatives returned for €41.91 in a 4 day turnaround.

So for me I won't be doing my own C41 developing, just the B&W.

Sirius Glass said:

I use the Unicolor 1 liter kit in the Jobo processor. The kit can develop up to 16 rolls over a day or too. So developing the film is not a problem, but I do not want to take the time to make one or two sets of prints of every photograph, so I just sent it out.

Click to expand...

As long as color processing and printing are available, I will continue sending rolls of film out. When those go away, I will go back to processing and enlarging at home.

For me, it would depend on how much C41 developing by lab cost. A few years ago I was mailing my film to a perfectly adequate lab, but usually no more than two rolls at a time...so while the processing costs weren't too high, postage added something like an extra 25% I was seriously considering doing my own C41 processing as with sufficient chemistry I could do 6 35mm films or four 120 rolls at once....or a combination thereof.

But then I discovered that almost on my doorstep there is a one person lab conveniently located for personal visits which also possibly offers the cheapest process and scan service in the UK. So for me, the answer is now obvious. Doing my own C41 would actually be no cheaper unless I was able to process 10 rolls at once.

In the 1980s I used to develop my color film, mainly 4x5. However, while processing a BW negative can be custom developed to yield certain desired qualities, color processing must be constant and invariable, and best done by machine. So the little color that I shoot is processed commercially. But if you enjoy developing color yourself, do it.

I have processed my own color film (neg and transparencies) but always considered it to be not economically sound, as I did not generally shoot enough rolls to process all within a reasonably short period to use the chemicals to capacity, and process control was made more difficult with low processing volume.
While shooting professionally, I found I use take film into pro labs and get one day turnaround, a high level of quality control (better than what I could do...without access to Kodak control strips) and get that all at very affordable rates.
So between what I could do vs. commercial processing, I had better ways to spend my time...not in a darkroom. I reached a point where the ONLY darkroom work I would do was printing selected transparencies onto Cibachrome/Ilfochrome reversal paper, as a hobbyist's enjoyable pasttime, not as a professional obligatory time...and commercial Cibachrome prints were nowhere as economical as printing it myself using my Jobo, and I could get absolute consistency from print to print.

And now the world has taken Cibachrome paper and chemistry out of existence. So I sold my Beseler 45V-XL enlarger and many associated things.

wiltw said:

I have processed my own color film (neg and transparencies) but always considered it to be not economically sound, as I did not generally shoot enough rolls to process all within a reasonably short period to use the chemicals to capacity, and process control was made more difficult with low processing volume.
While shooting professionally, I found I use take film into pro labs and get one day turnaround, a high level of quality control (better than what I could do...without access to Kodak control strips) and get that all at very affordable rates.
So between what I could do vs. commercial processing, I had better ways to spend my time...not in a darkroom. I reached a point where the ONLY darkroom work I would do was printing selected transparencies onto Cibachrome/Ilfochrome reversal paper, as a hobbyist's enjoyable pasttime, not as a professional obligatory time...and commercial Cibachrome prints were nowhere as economical as printing it myself using my Jobo, and I could get absolute consistency from print to print.

Click to expand...

I have come to the same conclusion plus I do not enjoy making one or two sets of prints of every photograph so that I have something to look at for determining making any future enlargements. YMMV

I shoot 4x5 so it costs to ship my precious film to Vancouver, then pay more than $5.00 a sheet to develop, then pay postage back. The lab charges for a the envelop and the box they ship back in too. And yes, the results were not 100% good.

So I pay $50 for a kit to develop 32 4x5 sheets.

Lower cost, better quality and I never lose possession of my film.

MattKing said:

That particular Rapid Fixer is an anomaly in the world of Rapid Fixers.

Kodak Rapid Fixer, Kodak C41 Fixer, Ilford Rapid Fixer and Ilford Hypam are the Rapid Fixers that I encounter most, and I believe are used most in the markets that I am familiar with.

They are all non-hardening, unless you elect to add hardener (to the ones compatible with hardener - Ilford Rapid Fixer is not). There are other Rapid Fixers that come from other suppliers that are also quite popular, and are, as far as I am aware also non-hardening.
Most importantly though, it is not necessary to have hardener in your Rapid Fixer, unless you choose to do so.

Click to expand...

I grew up in the darkroom while a young teen in the 1960's, and I always knew of Kodak Rapid Fixer coming with a separate bottle of Hardener. The 1988 edition of the Kodak lists it as 'Kodak Rapid Fixer with Hardener'. It still is available that way.

bags27 said:

Just want to say how grateful I am to all of you for pitching in. It's sort of renewed my enthusiasm for color developing. I realize that most of this is about materials and techniques, not so much about outcomes (which is what drives our obsession with B&W development). But still, it's very, very interesting.

I'm wondering if there's a book or article that sets out the Kodak kit (how to use; refresh, etc) and/or seperate bleach and fixer and what to buy. I'm trying to disentangle all this, but I know that Unique and other stores sell products designed also/instead for the professional, and I don't want to order the wrong thing. Also curious about bleach bypass.

Also, as I begin scanning, I'm starting to feel gratified by the effort I put in yesterday. Here: Lake Tahoe with Mamiya 7 43mm Portra 400 @200 in Unicolor. I'm always astonished by how sharp Mamiya glass is. Thanks again!

Sino Promise has literature online for C-41 process. Impossible to find Kodak chemistry at this time. Fuji has same information online. Kodak and Fuji require you buy quite a volume of chemistry.

Click to expand...

Freestyle has kits of their own, Fuji and Tetenal. Very easy and low waste.