Lab Looking to let customers specify chemistry, what should we offer?

[Leigh B]

I'm sorry, I didn't see that you mentioned HC-110 in your post.

That's because I didn't.

I mentioned two other developers that are waaay more long-lived than HC-110, which has been reported to die very shortly.

- Leigh

 

[removed account4]

Dealing with customer expectations has crossed my mind. It's going to be necessary to put a big disclaimer in flashing red letters "YOU MIGHT NOT GET THE RESULTS YOU EXPECT, USE THIS FORM AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!", and even then there will inevitably be some issues. I'm not sure how many of you have worked in labs before, but those kinds of issues are nothing new for us. Even a perfect lab would have to deal with customers being upset due to their own ignorance.

disclaimers are good ..
good luck with your plans !

 

[mgb74]

I'm going to rain on your parade. I think you're overstating the benefits, and understating the risks, of offering a highly customizable capability.

Every developer comes with a learning curve to be mastered. And, by offering a specific developer, you're making an implicit statement that you have mastered that learning curve. So beyond all the questions of developer characteristics and lasting power, there's the question of whether you'll be able to meet customer expectations (as Brady Eklund suggested). I don't care how many disclaimers you put on your site, how big the font is, and how fast they flash, when you screw up someone's film - IN THEIR MIND - they will tell you and everyone else about it. Doesn't matter if the fault was really theirs.

So if you offer Perceptol, or caffenol, or bourbonol, you have to learn it and practice it. And keep the chemicals fresh.

Frankly, I believe that if someone wants some esoteric developer, or some odd agitation process, or they pray at the alter of Rodinal, they're likely to do the film development themselves. Not every single one perhaps, but not enough to be a profitable market even for a small scale operation. Think how easy it is to process b/w in a bathroom.

One exception is 4x5, which you don't do.

So start with a Kodak developer that is geared toward lab use. Why Kodak - because I think most emulsions are designed to work well with D-76, HC-110, maybe xtol. Perhaps add a 2nd developer and/or technique (like stand development) that provides a characteristic that the first does not offer (for example, stain, push processing). You control temp, agitation, etc per the manufacturer directions - consistently (that consistency is part of the value you bring).

I've never run a lab but I'll be that if you talk to those that have, they'll tell you that consistency was critical for a quality product.

 

[Pete Myers]

Hi Leigh:
My vote would be for Rodinal, Xtol, and 510 Pyro. That would cover a lot of tastes, and excellent shelf life for each. The 510 Pyro would require an alkaline fixer---TF-4 or TF-5 type.
Good luck! I think it could be fun.
Pete

 

[RalphLambrecht]

We're a small lab in Eau Claire, WI and we do a fair amount of mail-order developing, hand-processing half a dozen to a dozen rolls of black and white a week. We're looking to overhaul our film-ordering website and offer some premium development services that let customers decide how we develop their film. My idea is basically to let them fill out a web form that will let them select different chemistry, dev times, agitation instructions, and have a lot more direct input into the development process. At the moment we just use HC-110 and stick pretty close to the Massive Dev Chart.

So my question is what would be a nice group of developers to offer alongside our HC-110 that would give our customers some variety and work well with the most commonly used films. Should we look into a few other fixers as well? We have a few in stock but mostly use Arista Universal Fixer. There are a ton of considerations to take into account with this question, and there's no one right answer, but I figure the expertise and experience of this forum will offer some very useful perspectives.

I believe offering D76 and Rodinal are a Must

 

[MattKing]

I mentioned two other developers that are waaay more long-lived than HC-110, which has been reported to die very shortly.

I am confused, because HC-110 in concentrate lasts for years - decades even.
Virtually indefinite life is one of HC-110's most important characteristics.
X-Tol is a developer with a more limited life once it is mixed up - did you mean to refer to it instead?

 

[TheToadMen]

?.. Pyrocat-HDC .... Simply that many folks out there would love to try a Pyro-style developers, but are just a little gun-shy due to the fact that pyro developer come with a "word of caution" in mixing and using them. I believe there would be a high demand for a lab using a pyro-style developer. ...

Yes. That would be true for me. I would love to try/use Pyrocat but don't want to learn a new system now. So I would like a Pyrocat lab. I can do HC110, Rodinal or Caffenol myself.

 

[klownshed]

I think the risks outweigh any potential benefits.

Are not the sort of people that want specific development methods the same people that develop themselves at home?

I think the market is too small for it to be worth messing with your standard workflow and chemistry. Passing on the risk to the customer with disclaimers won't stop them complaining.

I can't see how it can be economically viable for either party.

I certainly wouldn't want to be in customer support dealing with the 'experts' either.

 

[bernard_L]

Are not the sort of people that want specific development methods the same people that develop themselves at home?

+1 !!
Indeed, that was what I wanted to post, and found this as I reviewed the previous responses. Unless you decide to go into a specific market: folk who want to specify this or that developer (based on internet folklore rather than own experience), cannot develop themselves, and have deep pockets (b/c storing and handling multiple developers has a cost). Which means you would be pricing yourself out from a fraction of your potential "plain-vanilla-HC110" customers.

 

[Pat Erson]

We're a small lab in Eau Claire, WI and we do a fair amount of mail-order developing, hand-processing half a dozen to a dozen rolls of black and white a week.

D-76 stock or 1+1, Diafine; DD-X 1+4 for high-speed films.

 

[Helios 1984]

Dealing with customer expectations has crossed my mind. It's going to be necessary to put a big disclaimer in flashing red letters "YOU MIGHT NOT GET THE RESULTS YOU EXPECT, USE THIS FORM AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!", and even then there will inevitably be some issues. I'm not sure how many of you have worked in labs before, but those kinds of issues are nothing new for us. Even a perfect lab would have to deal with customers being upset due to their own ignorance.

Maybe you could show them samplers of the results they should expect with each chemistry? Or maybe do a nice description.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'm going to rain on your parade. I think you're overstating the benefits, and understating the risks, of offering a highly customizable capability.

Every developer comes with a learning curve to be mastered. And, by offering a specific developer, you're making an implicit statement that you have mastered that learning curve. So beyond all the questions of developer characteristics and lasting power, there's the question of whether you'll be able to meet customer expectations (as Brady Eklund suggested). I don't care how many disclaimers you put on your site, how big the font is, and how fast they flash, when you screw up someone's film - IN THEIR MIND - they will tell you and everyone else about it. Doesn't matter if the fault was really theirs.

So if you offer Perceptol, or caffenol, or bourbonol, you have to learn it and practice it. And keep the chemicals fresh.

Frankly, I believe that if someone wants some esoteric developer, or some odd agitation process, or they pray at the alter of Rodinal, they're likely to do the film development themselves. Not every single one perhaps, but not enough to be a profitable market even for a small scale operation. Think how easy it is to process b/w in a bathroom.

One exception is 4x5, which you don't do.

So start with a Kodak developer that is geared toward lab use. Why Kodak - because I think most emulsions are designed to work well with D-76, HC-110, maybe xtol. Perhaps add a 2nd developer and/or technique (like stand development) that provides a characteristic that the first does not offer (for example, stain, push processing). You control temp, agitation, etc per the manufacturer directions - consistently (that consistency is part of the value you bring).

I've never run a lab but I'll be that if you talk to those that have, they'll tell you that consistency was critical for a quality product.

This makes sense to me. More variables introduces more risk.

When I worked in a professional photo lab the key really was consistency. That is why they have test strips to make sure all is well at the beginning of each day, and sometimes half way through depending on how much film was processed. E6, C41, and B&W. We used replenished Xtol, and developing times for all kinds of films, including push/pull processing, were documented over time, including rolls shot by staff of unknown film, which they'd run for free in exchange for the slight experimentation in figuring out developing times. I remember shooting Efke film KB25, KB50, and KB100 and helping them establish developing times for those emulsions.
After getting to know their repeat customers, the guys running the processing machines would develop a dialog about film exposure and developing times to get the most out of the process. It took years to establish and maintain those relationships, and the data of having perfect results was very hard won (for all three lines). The professional studios that sent in 300 rolls of E6 chromes at a time had their lighting and exposures calibrated to the processing they were used to. If the process changed just a little bit, their expensive film could be jeopardized. So, consistency.
Now imagine doing this for two, three, or more developers with all of the various films out there. Each customer's preference is a variable, as is their shooting technique, metering technique, metering equipment, lighting conditions, and intent. One of the few things that remain constant is the processing cycle, if done well. If you make that a variable too, then what will the reference point be?
The mind boggles, at least in this guy's cranium.

 

[Harry Stevens]

I agree with others if you know of these fancy developers then you wont be using a lab. I would stick to one developer either HC110 or D76 if I ran a lab doing some BW work.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I agree with others if you know of these fancy developers then you wont be using a lab. I would stick to one developer either HC110 or D76 if I ran a lab doing some BW work.

Great idea. Sometimes if a vendor offers too many choices, it just causes confusion. I would offer "High Acutance" film developing if the developer is HC-110 and "Fine Grain" developing if the soup is D-76.

 

[Craig]

I think the first thing to look at is your supply chain: Which developer can you reliably get whenever you need it? There is no point in offering a developer if there is a 6 month lead time to get more when you run out.

Then I would standardize on one developer for most of your work - I'd use replentished Xtol for the best overall image quality; and one "specialist" developer. I'd want to see pyrocat for this as it's a bit unusual and many may not want to experiment with buying the chemistry if they can send a roll out and see what they get. I wouldn't go over 2 developers unless you've got deep experience with another one and know how the films will respond.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The risks are overstated. Tone it down, please. Maybe use selenium, gold, or sepia.

 

[bvy]

HC-110, which has been reported to die very shortly.

Huh?

 

[Craig]

I would offer "High Acutance" film developing if the developer is HC-110 and "Fine Grain" developing if the soup is D-76.

D-76 has higher acutance than HC-110...

 

[John Wiegerink]

I think the first thing to look at is your supply chain: Which developer can you reliably get whenever you need it? There is no point in offering a developer if there is a 6 month lead time to get more when you run out.

Then I would standardize on one developer for most of your work - I'd use replentished Xtol for the best overall image quality; and one "specialist" developer. I'd want to see pyrocat for this as it's a bit unusual and many may not want to experiment with buying the chemistry if they can send a roll out and see what they get. I wouldn't go over 2 developers unless you've got deep experience with another one and know how the films will respond.

Those are my feelings exactly! Xtol in a replenishing system and Pyrocat for the folks that don't dare try it themselves, which there are plenty of. I'd say keep it to a minimum and two developers like mentioned ought to be able to be controlled. One pyro.....one conventional........all you need!

 

[Europan]

Brady, beware!

I have had my own commercial film lab and believe me, most customers, if not all with very few exceptions, don’t get the point about the offer. On the contrary, they want their films to be processed best or according to manufacturer specifications. Only single persons, rather professionals, know how to tweak film and chemistry for a benefit. If you want to exploit your know-how and or possibilities, do it quietly with local customers. Invite an engaged person who shows up to a table talk, open yourself to those who merit your attendance, not everybody. I had exactly that offer in my prospect and price list. It never got asked for besides one time. There was a producer with money and something to lose. His project was a movie on 35mm film and he did lose. He even made a down payment for my expenses, which I reimbursed after his debacle. But we parted in good terms with another bag of experiences both of us.

It might be a little different with stills photography but I doubt it. Keep your secrets to yourself and enjoy what comes in from applying them. My 2 liters

 

[Leigh B]

X-Tol is a developer with a more limited life once it is mixed up - did you mean to refer to it instead?

Hi Matt,

No, HC-110.

One of our members recently posted that his had failed only a few months after opening it.

I use neither of those, so no personal experience. Just repeating what I read on the 'net.
If it's on the 'net, it must be true... right ???

- Leigh

 

[MattKing]

No, HC-110.

One of our members recently posted that his had failed only a few months after opening it.

If that member's experience was accurately reported, it would be extraordinary indeed.

 

[Wallendo]

Speaking from a consumer's standpoint, the only time I would request a specific developer would be for boutique film such as Adox SilverMax or Foma Retropan 320 Soft, films where very specific developers are recommended. I doubt that either of those films, or Technical Pan for that matter, make up a big chunk of your business.
Before I started developing B&W at home, I mailed my film off, assuming that the lab would make the best possible choices. Most likely, your B&W customers feel the same.

 

[removed account4]

i would offer plain vanilla offerings and have a few things off the books
like "the secret menu" let a customer or 2 know you will use a boutique developer
and charge accordingly, if it works out well, offer the another developer in your offerings.
i've done this for people before. i process film in sprint film developer for clients,
and if someone who knows i process with sumatranol CD wants me to, i will ...
offering too many things is like trying to figure out how to order a drink at a upscale cafe, its no longer " a coffee please"
but its a double half-caf skim brevé, upside down *quad dopio full, dopio decaf,) carmel salted rim ristreto macchiato

 

[Bob Carnie]

The first thing I would say , is how many here would be able to tell the developed difference (of a typical film like FP4 ) between HC110, rodinal, pyro , d 76/ID11 , xtoll .

My guess would be 1% ... Keep your offerings very simple.