Most affordable approach to film

[frank]

If you are going to process three rolls every weekend, you don't need a "kit", you just need basic tools: a tank, some developer and some fixer. You can skip the stop bath and use water rinse and it will be fine. If you use a Rapid Fix and fix for the minimum amount of time, you can do the fast "Ilford Wash" and you won't need hypo clear. For cost effectiveness and to avoid mixing and storing a developer, you can opt for Rodinal or HC110. This can be as simple or as complicated as you want - but I prefer simplicity. I'm in love with the results, not the process.

^ This, (except for not loving the process part ) and for tools, you'll need a daylight changing bag, developing tank with reels, and a thermometer.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

momus,
I agree with most of what you say, but the "Hit in quality part" about digital is where I have to jump off the train. Different, yes! Lesser quality, no! I shoot both and each has its place, but one is NOT better than the other. If cost is your main concern? Don't even think about film then or you'll soon change your mind. That's even if you do your own processing and printing. The cost of film is just much higher per picture/shot and that's a fact. Now, if you ask me what I like to waste my time on that's different. I'll gladly waste my time with film and a darkroom. I used to make all my spending money shooting weddings every fricking weekend and if I were to go back into it now it sure wouldn't be with any film camera that's for sure. Same goes for sport photographers and film. Find me a sports photographer that shoots film and you win a Kewpie Doll. It took me about 65 years to learn two things in life not to say. Never say never and absolutely 'cause there are no absolutes. P.S. I still prefer film the old fashion way just like my 20 year old slippers. I'm comfortable with both. John W

How about keeping digital vs film crap at the minimum? Especially "cost". Do you realize it is MF thread?
Do you realize where is no even half-frame digital MF? This is the fact. So, lenses are wasted same way as they are wasted on digital croppers.

 

[shutterlight]

Hi LMNOP,
Well, IMO, Shooting color film these days doesn't make a ton of sense to me, 'cause you're going to scan it anyway right?
I don't scan. Color is Dig....black and white is printed in the darkroom.
Dev your own fill to save money. It's pretty simple mate. For BW I use PMK Pyro and it's very economical. Part of the problem is with many photographers today, when they went digital, they turned into machine guns...shooting
a ridiculous amount of frames to get the shot. Volume of images went up, quality plummeted.
I feel digital can really make a photographer lazy. Not processing your own film is too...unless of course we're
talking color...life has made that tougher.

Years ago working as a stringer for the wire service, digital was in its infancy...it sucked. I shot 35 neg at sports events, then hand processed with Jobo hand tanks. AGFA made these great C41 kits, and I had a Rubbermade tub half filled with
water, with two fish tank heaters at 42 C. Loaded reels in a dark bag, processed, then loaded reels into a DIY dryer made out of a dryer vent tube with a hair dryer attached at the top...I got so fast at it, I was beating many of the digital photographers to the server uploads with higher quality images...ah, the good old days.

When I shoot film, (BW) which is most of what I do now despite having a full digital system, I am selective,
especially with med. format. I use less frames to achieve a good image. Slow down, take the time to compose, be selective...edit in the camera.

Dirtiest words in photography..."We'll fix it in post".

Photographing in color is not tantamount to photographing digitally. I do scan, and have done my own scanning for many years now. I also print my own work. Color negative film offers a dynamic range that digital cannot match, particularly with highlight retention. When paired with an Imacon Flextight scanner, you can save virtually any highlight with color negative film (within probably four to five stops). I like the way color negative film looks a lot more than digital. It's more organic in appearance and not as sharp (in a good way).

I do mix some digital in, because I've scanned my pictures and edited in Lightroom for a long time now. The base of my work is film, however, and i hope it remains that way for a long time. The effective 4x5 aspect ratio of 6x7 film is highly preferable to 3:2, which I don't really like much.

 

[removed account4]

hi op

you can probably by an inexpensive ( or expensive if you never want to replace it )
rotary processing system like a used ( or new jobo ) ey might be $$ upfront but you will have no
trouble whatsoever processing your own film. the only thing you will need is water, electricity and being able to put the film on reels in the tanks ...
your price to process your own color will drop from dollars to cents ...

I can't speak for MF bulk, some love it and others don't want to deal and they just buy bricks at a time.
if you buy in bulk don't forget the fridge some say you will need to store it all
since it might not get shot in a short amount of time ...
personally the expense of the fridge, the power to run it, the and the automated processing
has always exceeded the cost and convenience of sending out, and buying as I go .. but
that's me, others jump at the experience of keeping everything in house, and in bulk...

good luck

 

[MattKing]

I know there are a lot of scan haters out there, but I like to have digital copies of all my work, and for that I scan every single negative, and that is their primarily existence.

What I'm looking for is a basic BW dev kit for the home. I can do the processing in my kitchen sink and hang the negs in my bathtub. If I shoot three rolls of BW in a weekend, it would be really nice to just develop the negatives myself, then scan/preserve for the future date when I have access to a print facility. Anyone have suggestions for BW kits?

If you were nearby, I could give you all that you need in the way of equipment, just from the extras I have lying around.

Both Kodak and Ilford have excellent "getting started" publications on their website. Craigslist is often a great source for basic film developing kit, and often for printing kit as well.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Of course one could save money by developing the film. But my tale of caution ...

I was happy. I had one Nikon slr with a 28mm to 300mm zoom lens that my girl friend had won for me.
I found APUG. I should have known better.
Then I bought a second Nikon slr to shoot black & white.
I started developing black & white film.
I saw a 4"x5" color enlarger on Craig's list and bought it.
I set up a darkroom in my place.
I bought a 36" wide drum print dryer.
I inherited a Mamiya 330 with 65mm, 80mm, and 250mm lenses and every accessory in the known world for it.
I went to a camera store to trade the Mamiya 65mm lens for the 55mm lens and walked out of the store with a Hasselblad and its 250mm lens and no longer had the Mamiya.
I bought a tripod.
I bought the 80mm lens.
I bought the 50mm lens.
I bought the 150mm lens.
I bought film backs.
I bought lens hoods.
I bought a Voightlander Vito II.
I bought filters.
I bought a 2X extender.
I bought a SWC.
I bought a 1953 4"x5" Pacemaker Speed Graphic.
I bought a 1928 Graflex Model D.
I bought several barrel and shuttered 4"x5" lenses.
I bought a Graphic Vulcanite Case
I bought a Graphic flashgun, two reflects, 800+ #5 and #25 flashbulbs, #11 bulbs, #2 bulbs
I bought a Gossen light meter.
I bought a Jobo CPE processor color processing.
I bought a Jobo CPP2 processor.
I sold the Jobo CPE processor.
I bought a Jobo 3010 Expert Drum.
I bought a Tessina.
I bought a Jobo 3063 Print Drum.
I bought a spot meter attachment for the light meter.
I bought another Jobo print drum.
I bought a WideLux 7 camera.
I bought a carbon fiber tripod.
​

There is a store in Atlanta
They call the KEH
And it's been the ruin of many a poor boy
And God I know I'm one ...

Heed well my lesson lest this happen to you!

 

[Terry Breedlove]

Developing color film at home.

http://youtu.be/c4nRPckotCw

 

[CropDusterMan]

I like the way color negative film looks a lot more than digital. It's more organic in appearance and not as sharp (in a good way).

There's that word again. "organic". Probably the most overused word these days...but I do see what you mean shutterlight, I too like the look of neg film scanned...

 

[frank]

There's that word again. "organic". Probably the most overused word these days...but I do see what you mean, I too like the look of neg film scanned...but...

Film has soul. That drives some people nuts.


(Don't take the bait, it's not worth it.)

 

[pentaxuser]

my local shop will develop for $4.95 but I have been lead to believe that their processing is cheaper and less conside rate toward the particular film type.

From what source did you hear that? This needs checking out. The local shop may not operate its processing properly and this is what needs checking out. If it does a poor job then it will be poor for all C41 films but if it pays attention to what it is doing then the correct process for C41 is correct whether it is for $4 or $400.

pentaxuser

 

[polyglot]

I know there are a lot of scan haters out there, but I like to have digital copies of all my work, and for that I scan every single negative, and that is their primarily existence.

I do similar as it's a bit hard to make an offsite backup of your negs. However, I also print both B&W and colour in the darkroom; you will be amazed at how much sharper an optical print from good big film is compared to a digitally-exposed C41 print.

What I'm looking for is a basic BW dev kit for the home. I can do the processing in my kitchen sink and hang the negs in my bathtub. If I shoot three rolls of BW in a weekend, it would be really nice to just develop the negatives myself, then scan/preserve for the future date when I have access to a print facility. Anyone have suggestions for BW kits?

Don't bother with a kit unless it's someone selling off a darkroom; the kits you see for sale in shops are usually the cheap/crap version of everything, just new. Get on eBay and buy the bits you need as used and high quality - the list is in my FAQ and it's pretty short. You can buy chemicals at your local photo shop, or order from B&H since you ain't far from there.

 

[JW PHOTO]

How about keeping digital vs film crap at the minimum? Especially "cost". Do you realize it is MF thread?
Do you realize where is no even half-frame digital MF? This is the fact. So, lenses are wasted same way as they are wasted on digital croppers.

Hey, 95% of what I do is film, film, film! When somebody makes a statement as an absolute and it's not, then somebody else should bring it to their/our attention. I'm in no way stating that digital is the way to go, but to say it's not the way to go for some folks is false also. Your last statement about lenses and format for digital, if I understand you, is wrong also. But like you say, let's not even mention the word digital since it's evil, bad and certainly has nothing to do with photography. I wonder how many pictures would be posted here on this site without the use of f*#^#*g digitizing your image????? Time to get real here.........back to the darkroom. JohnW

 

[Sirius Glass]

momus,
I agree with most of what you say, but the "Hit in quality part" about digital is where I have to jump off the train. Different, yes! Lesser quality, no! I shoot both and each has its place, but one is NOT better than the other. If cost is your main concern? Don't even think about film then or you'll soon change your mind. That's even if you do your own processing and printing. The cost of film is just much higher per picture/shot and that's a fact. Now, if you ask me what I like to waste my time on that's different. I'll gladly waste my time with film and a darkroom. I used to make all my spending money shooting weddings every fricking weekend and if I were to go back into it now it sure wouldn't be with any film camera that's for sure. Same goes for sport photographers and film. Find me a sports photographer that shoots film and you win a Kewpie Doll. It took me about 65 years to learn two things in life not to say. Never say never and absolutely 'cause there are no absolutes. P.S. I still prefer film the old fashion way just like my 20 year old slippers. I'm comfortable with both. John W

How about keeping digital vs film crap at the minimum? Especially "cost". Do you realize it is MF thread?
Do you realize where is no even half-frame digital MF? This is the fact. So, lenses are wasted same way as they are wasted on digital croppers.

+1

Focus and stay on topic, please.

 

[CropDusterMan]

Hey Frank-checked out your site...nice looking darkroom. I'm from Kingston originally.

 

[LMNOP]

I am pretty sold on sticking with film, not sure why digital is even coming up. Yes, I digitize my negs with a scanner, that is a must. I just discovered the power of Velvia 50 today, and I am sad to see that much more money out the window, because I am now forced to order many rolls of this beautiful film. I have never seen such crisp, clear detail from film, ever in my life. I've shot many rolls on my RZ, but somehow, never slide film.

I appreciate all of your advice. I have a LOT to read, based on your comments and suggestions. Developing BW negs at home will happen soon. I have some research to do!

 

[frank]

Hey Frank-checked out your site...nice looking darkroom. I'm from Kingston originally.

Thanks! I grew up in Kingston: La Salle high school and Queens U.

 

[RPC]

Well, IMO, Shooting color film these days doesn't make a ton of sense to me, 'cause you're going to scan it anyway right?
I don't scan. Color is Dig....black and white is printed in the darkroom.

This irks me because there are still those who print color film optically as I do and with good reason. The much more natural look of optical prints done right, and better dynamic range of film is much preferred over digital IMO.

 

[LMNOP]

This irks me because there are still those who print color film optically as I do and with good reason. The much more natural look of optical prints done right, and better dynamic range of film is much preferred over digital IMO.

Agreed. I can't imagine shooting digital just for color. Everything I love about film is specific to both color and black and white varieties.

 

[philipus]

Can one find 70mm film today, for instance for use in a Hasselblad? Where is this sold?

I know there are a lot of scan haters out there, but I like to have digital copies of all my work, and for that I scan every single negative, and that is their primarily existence.

What I'm looking for is a basic BW dev kit for the home. I can do the processing in my kitchen sink and hang the negs in my bathtub. If I shoot three rolls of BW in a weekend, it would be really nice to just develop the negatives myself, then scan/preserve for the future date when I have access to a print facility. Anyone have suggestions for BW kits?

This is what I use and I think it is a pretty basic setup.

Dead Link Removed

The cost (excluding the changing tent) was less than 100€. I got the tent because I don't have any room where I live which I can make sufficiently light-proof. I hang the films in the shower using a hanger and simple metal paper clamps. I use the big ones as weights at the end of each roll. The thermometer is a digital one because I want quick readings. I've used analog ones too but find them a bit tedious.

The bulk loader is bigger than may be needed. I bought this one (Alden 200) because I wanted to bulk load Kodak 5222. The cassettes are simple plastic reusable cassettes but one can also re-use ordinary film rolls.

br
Philip

 

[sagai]

Developing color film at home.

http://youtu.be/c4nRPckotCw

We can do it super-super cheap.
I have a very used second hand developer tank, a body temperature meter, a kettle plus a bathroom and that's all I need for 35mm film.
Costs me 1/2 USD to develop a 135/35 c41.

Oh ... Kodak colorplus (that is I think actually Kodak gold) costs slightly less than 2 USD per a 36(+3 exposures when put the film in the camera in the darkroom ) canister.
We can do it really super super cheap.

 

[Sirius Glass]

This irks me because there are still those who print color film optically as I do and with good reason. The much more natural look of optical prints done right, and better dynamic range of film is much preferred over digital IMO.

Especially because a chemical print looks and feels better than any stink-jet print.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Can one find 70mm film today, for instance for use in a Hasselblad? Where is this sold?



This is what I use and I think it is a pretty basic setup.

Dead Link Removed

The cost (excluding the changing tent) was less than 100€. I got the tent because I don't have any room where I live which I can make sufficiently light-proof. I hang the films in the shower using a hanger and simple metal paper clamps. I use the big ones as weights at the end of each roll. The thermometer is a digital one because I want quick readings. I've used analog ones too but find them a bit tedious.

The bulk loader is bigger than may be needed. I bought this one (Alden 200) because I wanted to bulk load Kodak 5222. The cassettes are simple plastic reusable cassettes but one can also re-use ordinary film rolls.

br
Philip

I heard that Ilford will produce it during the custom film order period every spring.

 

[Moopheus]

This irks me because there are still those who print color film optically as I do and with good reason. The much more natural look of optical prints done right, and better dynamic range of film is much preferred over digital IMO.

How hard is it to print color if you are color blind? I'm red-green color blind (but I know what red is; green is more theoretical). I've always assumed I couldn't do it optically. Paying someone else to do it is generally not an option.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have heard that color blind people can sense different shades of certain colors much better than people who are not color blind. Have you found this to be true?

 

[polyglot]

Can one find 70mm film today, for instance for use in a Hasselblad? Where is this sold?

That's the hard part, the only real option in 70mm is to get lucky, buy up a big stock of near-fresh film cheaply when it comes available and use it over a few years. No one is making it new now except Maco IR400/400S (probably the only affordable fresh medium format infrared film you can get) and Ilford in their ULF run, and the ULF pricing is about 3x higher than for 120 so it's pointless unless you have a camera that absolutely requires 70mm.

The cost (excluding the changing tent) was less than 100€. I got the tent because I don't have any room where I live which I can make sufficiently light-proof. I hang the films in the shower using a hanger and simple metal paper clamps. I use the big ones as weights at the end of each roll. The thermometer is a digital one because I want quick readings. I've used analog ones too but find them a bit tedious.

The bulk loader is bigger than may be needed. I bought this one (Alden 200) because I wanted to bulk load Kodak 5222. The cassettes are simple plastic reusable cassettes but one can also re-use ordinary film rolls.

ahahaha, yes 35mm bulk loading is cheap and easy. Now go see if you can even *find* an Alden 70, and then check out the price. See also the price on 70mm developing tanks.

There are a few 70mm threads on APUG wherein we discuss hacky ways of making this work on the cheap. For example, I bulk-load into my cassettes (which average $10-$15 each on the used market mind you) in my darkroom instead of using a loader. And when I develop, I cut each roll into 3 lengths equivalent to a 220 roll and develop them on Jobo 2502 reels that I've 3D-printed an expansion adapter for. My only costs were the 3D prints (~$0, maybe $40 if you go to Shapeways), $150 for the back and that's about it. If you do it with OEM designed-for-70mm equipment you can easily pay $300 for a loader and $400 for a development tank that will take a full 15' cartridge.

Using 70mm today if you're not stinking rich requires that you be technically capable of building/hacking things, inventive, an inveterate tightwad and happy to use (perhaps very) expired film. Certainly not everyone's cup of tea.

I like 70mm for sure and I can shoot very cheaply from my frozen stocks, but you should know what you're in for before considering buying a 70mm back.