The cost of color film and processing

[Paul Howell]

Looking at my Wards Photography Catalog 1952 color film is still cheap, in the 50s and 60s my parents shot one roll of color a year. In my area to shot a roll of 36, process and print totals about $40. I was going to process but could not find C41 or R4 chemistry. The supply chain might have caught up by now, but I'm going to focus on black and white and shoot the digital for color.

 

[koraks]

Maybe I should have said that current film prices still represent amazing value

Your argument is essentially a subjective one. Value and price are related, but entirely different things. I see your point, but it's idiosyncratic.

 

[guangong]

Could not have said it better. Except, of course, as the Soap Box has been removed, the alternative now is closure of the thread!

You can ignore reality, but reality won’t ignore you.

 

[MattKing]

You can ignore reality, but reality won’t ignore you.

Except in this case this site has rules that limit the subjects of discussion, so no one has any need to ignore reality, they just need to take elsewhere the discussion of certain parts of reality, or belief, or dogma, or myth, or whatever.

 

[jtk]

The future of film is easily determined by confirming the identities of labs that process E6 to a professional quality standard within driving distance from your home. E6 is the last gasp at an attempt to serve a portion of the Kodachrome market. It may be that C41 labs will survive for a few more years.

 

[jtk]

I personally helped set up several mini-labs in Northern California. They prospered, then died. There is one (precisely) photo lab in New Mexico's largest city. They do great work and price fairly but no longer processes E6 .

The second biggest challenge to photo labs is to retain young people as technicians when there are no employers in a city that pay lower.

Of course, it'll continue to be possible to buy film and processing kits online as long as vendors want those clients at those prices.

I doubt that film with bizarre characteristics will long be appealing for people who are actually into photography, as opposed to shopping.

 

[jtk]

Since the OT has importantly to do with cost I'll make a suggestion: establlish a non-profit buying club in your community. That has long been done by people who want to save on prices for organic food.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Here's an interesting article on the price of film over the years. Some have gone up a little, and others have gone down a little.

Film Prices Analyzed: Is Film Too Expensive?

In recent years, film has become considerably more expensive. Many think that it has even become too expensive, and feel ripped off by manufacturers like Kodak and Fuji. But how much did prices really rise, and why? Are we paying too much? A look at film prices in perspective.

silvergrainclassics.com

 

[mshchem]

Fuji has better projects to work on, Kodak is only able to spool so much, everything is in short supply, everything has gone up in dollar terms.

I'm trying to be careful. Seems one can talk about twirl vs inversion agitation all they want.

 

[reddesert]

What's changed recently is that the supply of C-41 film is low for manufacturing reasons, and there isn't any true budget C-41 film. As of maybe 2019-2020 you could still buy consumer C-41 film for around $4-5 a roll from eg B&H or Freestyle.

My memory of processing prices seems to be different from others. In the 1990s, minilabs and 1-hour photo were a little expensive, you paid for the convenience. I was a student and sent my C-41 film off to York Photo to get processing and prints for around $6 instead of the $12-15 it would cost at a minilab.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

The last roll of film I ordered processed & printed was a disposable from an impromptu road trip to Toronto in 2002. I've developed everything myself since shooting film regularly and have generally moved to a 'whole hog' hobbyist philosophy rather than a consumer mindset.

Traditional optical printing/enlarging can be largely subsumed by a scanning/digitization/inkjet workflow these days, but there's no substituting the film chemistry. AE/AF point & shoots and tacky giclee prints surround the step where the real magic happens -- development. IMO any truly keen modern enthusiast must have at least basic processing capacity to make it across the poseur threshold.

I'll have access to all modern color (and B&W) processes for the foreseeable future so long as washing soda, sulfite, and hypo remain available.

I doubt that film with bizarre characteristics will long be appealing for people who are actually into photography, as opposed to shopping.

Bitches do be shoppin' for print film.



FPP Ultra Blue 16mm, double 85B filtered in daylight, developed ECP-2, positive scan and direct inversion.

 

[guangong]

Except in this case this site has rules that limit the subjects of discussion, so no one has any need to ignore reality, they just need to take elsewhere the discussion of certain parts of reality, or belief, or dogma, or myth, or whatever.

Except those held by Marr King.

 

[koraks]

@guangong don't make this into something it simply isn't. This is a photography forum, that's all. You don't like it, take it elsewhere.

 

[Agulliver]

I think there are a lot of factors at play here.

Any of us who started before the "mini-lab era" (say late 70s or earlier) can remember what it was like to drop a film off, wait a few days and pay quite a lot in terms of average wages for the processing and prints. If you were really lucky, you got a free "house brand" film back which would be bog standard 100ASA C41 regardless of what film you handed in. I was lucky living quite near one of the UK's mega-labs (PTP). But I was just a kid relying on my parents to furnish me with film....and even with decidedly middle class jobs, there was a limit to how much film we could buy and use. It was considered something of a luxury. When the free film started coming in, it was something of a godsend. Even if the disguised Ferrania film wasn't as good as Kodacolor....it was adequate and effectively free.

The real boom happened a couple of decades later, in the 90s and early 21st century.....when mini-lab processing and cheap, decent C41 film was *everywhere*. Before phones and before digital cameras became a practical proposition, casual photography was made possible by the amazing deals that could be had. Film was churned out in such vast numbers, especially 135, that it really was cheaper than a bag of chips (British sense of the word). Getting a roll back free with D&P became the norm, supermarkets, petrol stations, convenience stores and even market stalls sold film. Then when this bubble burst, film became even cheaper for a time as it was dumped onto the market for fast sale before it all expired.

Those are the recent memories, and I'd wager that for anyone under 40 or even 50 that's pretty much all they remember of film prices compared to income. Dirt cheap, omnipresent, the D&P services were likewise so cheap one rarely had to think about them.

Now the prices are probably more realistic. Until a couple of years ago, Color Plus was still very cheap. I could get 24 exposure cassettes for £3.50 or sometimes a little less. But with the bottlenecks in production, increased cost of all raw materials and the plague, it is hardly surprising the cost has increased a bit. Still...when Color Plus is available again it will be somewhere close to the target price mentioned here. Nobody knows exactly what Fuji are doing long term and whether C200 or Superia will make a reappearance.

As for lab services, I am very fortunate that I have a mini-lab a walk away from home. I can drop films off conveniently after work. £4 flat fee for dev and scan for all formats (even 127). I think that holds for E6 as well as C41. Prints are extra but still not expensive. I consider that a complete bargain. Other UK labs offer service around the £5-6 mark but I'd have to add postage, which doesn't make sense unless I gather together a few films. But the cheap labs are still there, and the ones left all seem to be doing good quality work.

 

[jtk]

Agulliver has a strange recollection. It's shocking to think somewhere on this earth labs failed to return processed film. Eastman Kodak and several others were nearly perfect in returning the processed film in sleeves in my California Sixties experience. No scratches.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I think there are a lot of factors at play here.

Any of us who started before the "mini-lab era" (say late 70s or earlier) can remember what it was like to drop a film off, wait a few days and pay quite a lot in terms of average wages for the processing and prints. If you were really lucky, you got a free "house brand" film back which would be bog standard 100ASA C41 regardless of what film you handed in. I was lucky living quite near one of the UK's mega-labs (PTP). But I was just a kid relying on my parents to furnish me with film....and even with decidedly middle class jobs, there was a limit to how much film we could buy and use. It was considered something of a luxury. When the free film started coming in, it was something of a godsend. Even if the disguised Ferrania film wasn't as good as Kodacolor....it was adequate and effectively free.

The real boom happened a couple of decades later, in the 90s and early 21st century.....when mini-lab processing and cheap, decent C41 film was *everywhere*. Before phones and before digital cameras became a practical proposition, casual photography was made possible by the amazing deals that could be had. Film was churned out in such vast numbers, especially 135, that it really was cheaper than a bag of chips (British sense of the word). Getting a roll back free with D&P became the norm, supermarkets, petrol stations, convenience stores and even market stalls sold film. Then when this bubble burst, film became even cheaper for a time as it was dumped onto the market for fast sale before it all expired.

Those are the recent memories, and I'd wager that for anyone under 40 or even 50 that's pretty much all they remember of film prices compared to income. Dirt cheap, omnipresent, the D&P services were likewise so cheap one rarely had to think about them.

Now the prices are probably more realistic. Until a couple of years ago, Color Plus was still very cheap. I could get 24 exposure cassettes for £3.50 or sometimes a little less. But with the bottlenecks in production, increased cost of all raw materials and the plague, it is hardly surprising the cost has increased a bit. Still...when Color Plus is available again it will be somewhere close to the target price mentioned here. Nobody knows exactly what Fuji are doing long term and whether C200 or Superia will make a reappearance.

As for lab services, I am very fortunate that I have a mini-lab a walk away from home. I can drop films off conveniently after work. £4 flat fee for dev and scan for all formats (even 127). I think that holds for E6 as well as C41. Prints are extra but still not expensive. I consider that a complete bargain. Other UK labs offer service around the £5-6 mark but I'd have to add postage, which doesn't make sense unless I gather together a few films. But the cheap labs are still there, and the ones left all seem to be doing good quality work.

I think that's a pretty good history, although for me on this side of the pond, dollar exchange rates. But, yeah.

Although my photo processing history goes back tot he 1950's.....OK, OK, just watching my father, I was a wee lad......I only got serious about photography as a hobby in my late 30's.

I bring this up because there was one other major film market historical event. The collapse of East Germany. For a few years Freestyle had tons of cheap films from there. I think Orwo was one.

Perhaps there was another ongoing market matter. With so much film everywhere, it was inevitable that sometimes businesses found themselves with too much film for one reason or another. Near expiration, didn't sell as expected, whatever. Outfits like Freestyle and Ultrafine would buy these on the cheap and pass the savings on.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Please see my message above. Maybe I should have said that current film prices still represent amazing value.

For the amazing technology that film production is, yes. If you have the income, yes. But many of us can not afford $15/roll 135 plus processing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Agulliver has a strange recollection. It's shocking to think somewhere on this earth labs failed to return processed film. Eastman Kodak and several others were nearly perfect in returning the processed film in sleeves in my California Sixties experience. No scratches.

Walmart is just one of the processors that refuses to return the film. Sadly this is becoming more common as processors look to scrimp and save whatever they can at the customers' cost.

 

[Paul Howell]

Historically film is less expensive, a roll of Kodacolor 35mm 20 exposures was $3.50 a roll in 1952 with inflation $39.14. A 3X4 print was .83 cent, or in 2022 or $9.50 a print or $190 a roll. Still does not change my calculus, I would rather spend my budget on Black and White.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Valvia 8 X 10

 

[AZD]

Just this week I dropped off a roll at an older pro lab in SLC to see how it goes. Base price is $4 for film processing and 40 cents per 4x6 print. If the quality is good enough I’ll probably use a little more color.

Following up on my earlier comment - Looks like I’m in luck. The prints look good for an 800 ISO waterproof disposable used by a kid. Really, that’s a compliment. Good color balance, good printing of the inevitable underexposed frames, nice Fuji paper. I have no doubt that results from a properly focused and exposed roll will be excellent. I’ll find out in a couple days.

They also process E6, and can do 35mm or 120, and possibly sheets, all at very reasonable prices. This could be fun!

 

[Agulliver]

Agulliver has a strange recollection. It's shocking to think somewhere on this earth labs failed to return processed film. Eastman Kodak and several others were nearly perfect in returning the processed film in sleeves in my California Sixties experience. No scratches.

Eh? I never said they did that.

 

[pentaxuser]

Eh? I never said they did that.

You took the words out of my mouth. I read and re-read your post about 3 times and couldn't find that statement. Presumably jtk confused your post with some other. I also thought your post summed up recent history of the post 40 years very well

So who said this, jtk?

pentaxuser

 

[Agulliver]

I wonder if the confusion is where I mentioned that by the late 70s, if you were lucky you got a free film back with your prints?

By which I meant that in addition to your processed negatives and prints, the bigger labs would also send a free unexposed C41 colour film, usually 100ASA as that was the "bog standard film" back then. The tag line being that if you kept using their lab, you'd never need to buy film again.

 

[runswithsizzers]

What is frustrating for me is not the cost of C-41 processing at my local lab, but the quality. There is a camera shop in my hometown that runs an old mini lab, but the the results are often terrible (underdeveloped). I don't know if they are skipping maintenance or not running proper quality control, or what. Even when they know they have a significant quality problem, they continue to take your money and process your film, poorly. Worse, the lab guy is very defensive which makes any attempt to discuss quality problems almost impossible. His attitude is, "We are the last working lab in the area, so where else are you going to go?"

How do you make your local lab do their job?

I process my own b&w, but I don't shoot enough color to make home C-41 practical, due the shelf life of the chemistry.