The cost of color film and processing

[ant!]

I'm happy to get a roll of 35mm or 120 C41 processed for CAD 4.50 here in Montreal (development only, cutting is 0.25 extra), that's good for me and my relatively low volume. And since it's right in the center of the old town, it's just a few minutes detour on my bike commute.

Black and white I process by myself, without claiming I am great with it (fighting still with drying marks...), but it's fun. Since I am slow, I use Rodinal and HC-110 due to their long shelf lives...

Film is still quite a bit in my freezer, all types, partly fresh and some bought cheap & expired. Good enough for me. I scan by myself. Takes time, but not too bad neither. If I want to have a better scan or a print, there are still enough shops around locally.

 

[braxus]

I also have used the London Drugs lab here in Chilliwack. Its convenient, but they dont do 120 there. Last time I sent them a C41 35mm roll, they botched it (because of new staff running the machines). My roll of Ektar 100 was extremely scratched all throughout the negative. When I worked at a lab, mistakes like that rarely happened. They really must have F'd the machine for it to be that bad. The allowed me a free set of high rez scans to fix the damage, but I haven't dropped off a roll since. Thats mostly because I rarely shoot 35mm C41 these days, as I use 120 most of the time. I will send them another set of rolls in the next month or so, to see if they fixed their issues. I don't even think the manager I saw at that time is even there anymore. Kim seems to be running it again.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Odd. I have numerous choices for C41 processing here in the SF Bay Area, and all of them are excellent up to 4x5 format. I last had to send my 8x10 C41 film to southern CA, but that's available locally again when I next need it. I've never gotten back any scratched roll or 35mm film since way way back when Kodak subcontracted Kodachrome processing to Kodalux. Never an issue with E6 and C41 film. But taking film to Walmart or some drugstore one-hour minilab? That's a recipe for inevitable problems.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Odd. I have numerous choices for C41 processing here in the SF Bay Area, and all of them are excellent up to 4x5 format. I last had to send my 8x10 C41 film to southern CA, but that's available locally again when I next need it. I've never gotten back any scratched roll or 35mm film since way way back when Kodak subcontracted Kodachrome processing to Kodalux. Never an issue with E6 and C41 film. But taking film to Walmart or some drugstore one-hour minilab? That's a recipe for inevitable problems.

Similarly there a wide range of choices in the Hollywood and Westside areas of Los Angeles and @Huss knows the ones in South Bay much better than I.

 

[Kevin Ekstrom]

My point of view is quite different from most who have posted.
I enjoy photography and have since the late 70's. Photography has always been an expensive hobby, even for those of us who lived through the film boom. Film may have been cheaper in the 60's, 70's and 80's but so where wages. It all evens out over the course of years. Now mind you, developing film has become more of a hassle these days simply because of the lack of neighborhood film labs. It cost me nearly 30.00 USD for a roll of 36 exposures to be processed, super scanned plus hard copy of prints on DVD, along with cut negatives sent back. Thats pricey, but I don't mind. It will never deter me from shooting film as often as I desire. Believe me, I am not rich either. I'm a simple blue-collar worker from the Midwest.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

My point of view is quite different from most who have posted.
I enjoy photography and have since the late 70's. Photography has always been an expensive hobby, even for those of us who lived through the film boom. Film may have been cheaper in the 60's, 70's and 80's but so where wages. It all evens out over the course of years. Now mind you, developing film has become more of a hassle these days simply because of the lack of neighborhood film labs. It cost me nearly 30.00 USD for a roll of 36 exposures to be processed, super scanned plus hard copy of prints on DVD, along with cut negatives sent back. Thats pricey, but I don't mind. It will never deter me from shooting film as often as I desire. Believe me, I am not rich either. I'm a simple blue-collar worker from the Midwest.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree. Most hobbies cost money. If you bowl once a week, golf regularly, fish off a charter, etc. If it gets too costly, you can always cut back by not machine gunning and be more disciplined in what you shoot. Your photography might actually get better in the process if you're more discerning. I often go out and find nothing worthy and don't shoot anything that day.

 

[jtk]

Odd. I have numerous choices for C41 processing here in the SF Bay Area, and all of them are excellent up to 4x5 format. I last had to send my 8x10 C41 film to southern CA, but that's available locally again when I next need it. I've never gotten back any scratched roll or 35mm film since way way back when Kodak subcontracted Kodachrome processing to Kodalux. Never an issue with E6 and C41 film. But taking film to Walmart or some drugstore one-hour minilab? That's a recipe for inevitable problems.

SF Bay area has always been rich in photographers due partially to the many; great universities and colleges and to its rich and complex demographics, to history of good employment (not just mere government jobs), to the fine museums and galleries, and to the beauty of Northern California. It's not surprising that good photo labs remain.

On the other hand, the best labs vanished, same as US overall. Who would choose to work in a photo lab if they made the typical 3X from Northern California's high tech.

And of course many of the people who shoot film have moved to Nevada.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The problem with big lab demise here was mainly the rug being pulled out from under them lease-wise to make room for expensive condos and fancy retail shops. That happened to wholesale picture framing suppliers too. Another major factor was the mistake of labs getting into parallel digital services too soon, still needing to pay off especially expensive novel equipment as well as annual service contracts, while newer more affordable options were already arriving. Kodak outright defaulted on some of its service contracts while still demanding payments for essentially obsolete equipment.

What has come up in the wake is a quantity of smaller niche labs. The remaining big film processing equipment has bounced around a bit from location to location, largely in neighborhoods where you'd want bulletproof siding if you lived there; but at least that service still exists. The smaller labs in boutique locations do 35mm and roll film processing and offer all kinds of digital printing, as well as optical "machine prints" (better quality snapshots), black and white film dev and scanning, etc, while other boutique venues provide fancier scans and LightJet or Lambda laser printing onto RA4 media. Local darkroom rentals and classes were interrupted by the pandemic, but are attempting to start up again. Still plenty of activity.

SF itself, however, is its own worst enemy. The bulldozer of gentrification and emphasis on extremely expensive tech leases downtown has driven pretty much everything else out except the most successful restaurants; and covid crippled those. Now with more techies choosing to work from home instead, many of those firms are downsizing their spaces and the city is getting worried about the vacuum. Yet they already flogged to death all the galleries and bookstores and neighborly local businesses. And who the heck wants to deal with all the commute hassle and traffic snarl if they don't have to. I rarely drive into SF anymore. But the same thing has happened to much of Berkeley. Bulldoze and then build something almost nobody can afford to actually live in, or even realistically lease as retail space.

 

[jtk]

Drew, from what I've seen in my very few return visits (my ancestors came to Northern CA in 1846 and farmed near Fremont), you're generally right.

However, people who work at home aren't necessarily mere "techies", whatever that means (today everybody lives by computer/phone).

And those of us who care enough to have learned PS basics probably aren't as "techie" as intense wannabe-Ansel darkroomer-types are, and maybe we actually care more about the photography itself.

Nobody anywhere wants to waste hours of their life driving to their place of work or to a photo lab, which some of use often did in order to benefit by actual teamwork with genuinely skilled technicians...back when real photo labs were close-at-hand (as opposed to Noritsulands).

 

[DREW WILEY]

Still a pretty short fast drive to labs on the East Bay, especially if you're trying to outpace gang war crossfire in those parts of town. Mostly kidding. The majority of photo related venues are in relatively uppity areas, at least during daytime hours. The ghouls come at night when no one else is around.

 

[jtk]

OK...so you've not addressed the central question...how many traditional labs remain that rival or exceed what one might do for oneself at home, using you-know-what cameras and software?

Certainly minilabs can't do that with any regularity. Obviously there are miserable and temporary minilabs but are they places anyone would visit hoping for reasonably good enlargements, not to mention clean chemistry for the film they think important? IMO its easier to make the big move toward better results.

 

[MattKing]

OK...so you've not addressed the central question...how many traditional labs remain that rival or exceed what one might do for oneself at home, using you-know-what cameras and software?

We have two good ones still here in the Vancouver area, and they are capable of doing superb work. In addition, their RA-4 prints from digital are much better than any inkjet prints I can do at home. As I understand it, their inkjet prints are good as well.

Certainly minilabs can't do that with any regularity. Obviously there are miserable and temporary minilabs but are they places anyone would visit hoping for reasonably good enlargements, not to mention clean chemistry for the film they think important? IMO its easier to make the big move toward better results.

A well maintained and competently operated minilab is more than capable of providing excellent quality - within the range of services it is designed for.
Historically, one of the local pro labs I mentioned above used top quality minilab equipment to handle development and proof/basic machine print work for its 35mm film customers, while still offering other equipment and work flows for the more critical printing work.

 

[foc]

A well maintained and competently operated minilab is more than capable of providing excellent quality - within the range of services it is designed for.
Historically, one of the local pro labs I mentioned above used top quality minilab equipment to handle development and proof/basic machine print work for its 35mm film customers, while still offering other equipment and work flows for the more critical printing work.

Thank you for pointing this out.
Unfortunately, minilabs get a bad name because of a few "fly by night" merchants.

Any lab is only as good as the people that operate it. Just as any camera is capable of producing an image but it is the eye behind it that creates the photograph (with in its limitations)

 

[jtk]

Thank you for pointing this out.
Unfortunately, minilabs get a bad name because of a few "fly by night" merchants.

Any lab is only as good as the people that operate it. Just as any camera is capable of producing an image but it is the eye behind it that creates the photograph (with in its limitations)

Minilabs are temporary by default...similar to short term bonds (easy to cash out of).

All they needed to start up was a short lease on location, a Noritsu or similar perhaps refurbished system and two minimum wage employees. If biz was less than around 200 rolls daily it was shuttered. Size of merchant is irrelevant. Sometimes the little owner was totally careless, incompetent, somewhat of a hobbiest. A lab selling services is more likely to be carefully watched-over (eg by Kodak quality control) than is an outfit started by some hobbiest who just cashed out of his retirement plan.

Yes, quality of "people who operate it" is important, but not nearly as important as the way the owner (usually temporary) understands his (new) business a few months after opening.

If a big company somehow wanted to be in the minilab business they would probably have better reasons than the hobbiest would. If Fox (for example) was still in the business, in their typical dying mall locations, it would be good for quality.

 

[jtk]

We have two good ones still here in the Vancouver area, and they are capable of doing superb work. In addition, their RA-4 prints from digital are much better than any inkjet prints I can do at home. As I understand it, their inkjet prints are good as well.


A well maintained and competently operated minilab is more than capable of providing excellent quality - within the range of services it is designed for.
Historically, one of the local pro labs I mentioned above used top quality minilab equipment to handle development and proof/basic machine print work for its 35mm film customers, while still offering other equipment and work flows for the more critical printing work.

Minilab machinery can do great work. The problem is with the business model, when it relies on poorly paid employees.

 

[MattKing]

Minilabs are temporary by default...similar to short term bonds (easy to cash out of).

Minilabs also made it possible for smaller towns to offer local film processing - and some of the best minilab operations were in the smaller centres.
In fact, a lot of the minilabs that survived the precipitous decrease in the film market are in smaller centres. The commercial rents were/are lower, and the operators tended to be the ones most invested in their customers, because they are/were their neighbours.
The photographic world is incredibly diverse. So for every few temporary minilabs, you can probably find a couple who are/were long term, quality operations.

 

[jtk]

Minilabs also made it possible for smaller towns to offer local film processing - and some of the best minilab operations were in the smaller centres.
In fact, a lot of the minilabs that survived the precipitous decrease in the film market are in smaller centres. The commercial rents were/are lower, and the operators tended to be the ones most invested in their customers, because they are/were their neighbours.
The photographic world is incredibly diverse. So for every few temporary minilabs, you can probably find a couple who are/were long term, quality operations.

Matt, you properly used "past tense" sentence structure.

Your last sentence amusingly qualifies your thinking with "probably" .

Evidently you mean half are gone.

I hope half do remain because some photographers do shoot their remaining inventory of film, even though hardly any are into it enough to actually scan and print it themselves (maybe). .

 

[MattKing]

It is like all of the rest of the world of photography. There are far fewer places that feature or offer services or equipment or supplies than there once was. But there still remain a decent number, plus a fair number of internet resources.
And some of those run minilabs, which are still being made new (in small numbers).
There are a lot more film related resources available now than there was in the 1950s or 1960s - they just aren't around every corner.
Enjoy the ones that are, and don't moan about the ones that are gone - because that just wastes time that can be better put to use using film - or something else, if that is what you prefer to do.

 

[jtk]

Matt, thanks for the prayers.

FWIW I've been doing a LOT of printing during this thread's life and make a lot of use of Canon Pro printers and paper as well as new and old Pentax cameras.

I'm an old man, and/but I've been an enthusiast for photography, old and new, ever since my mother taught me how to process and print 70+ years ago.. Today I'm installing sliding shelf steel cabinets for my prints.

I actually sold minilab systems, and giant print processors, for Colenta between decades in which I made my living with photography. I know something about the financials of those systems.

My opinion, fwiw, is that minilabs are part of the reasons so few photographers actually learn the craft side of what could become be their art. Like I said, FWIW.

 

[Huss]

The minilab I now use is the lab in my local photo shop - Paul's Photo in Torrance, CA. I assume it is a minilab because film goes in one end, after an extremely short period of time it comes out the other all done. No issues, great results.

Back when... I used to use Costco. Dev only was $1.84! This was maybe 10 years ago now. Most probably less than that before they pulled the plug. Costco pays its employees well (so no excuse with that). But sometimes my film will come back perfect, other times scratched. I found out why - one of the employees handled everything so carefully wearing cotton gloves. If I got her, my film was great. The other would literally drag the film across the floor as he moved it to where it would be cut and sleeved! Yup, if he handled my film, it would be scratched up. It wasn't that he was doing it deliberately, just that he was careless.

 

[takilmaboxer]

Minilabs were useful back when photographs were shared by prints. Now average people just pull out their phones and scroll through their images. I do too, but I waited patiently for a 5-pack of Gold 200 for my folders, it took me two months to shoot twelve shots on a Ikonta, and I'm about to mail it off to Dwayne's because I'm rarely happy with the results from the only lab in Albuquerque. Meanwhile I probably shot 100 pix on my Smart Phone and sent them to 50 friends. Times change.

 

[jtk]

I trade letter-size inkjet prints with a friend...he's better at portraits than I am...my stuff is mostly graphic or otherwise eccentric. I do wish the long-existing B&W inkjet print exchange still existed...excellent photographers, people who exhibit in galleries etc. Was about 25 active participants...maybe 4 or 5 could be counted on for beautiful contributions every couple of months. Was possible to learn a lot about print aesthetics from them...everybody had decades of silver printing behind them so they knew how to get what they wanted.

 

[DREW WILEY]

That's sure true. Every really good inkjet printer I know, whether in color or b&w, was an excellent darkroom printer first. They know what they want from it, and recognize the importance of self-restraint, along with the inherent limitations of any medium.

 

[jtk]

The minilab I now use is the lab in my local photo shop - Paul's Photo in Torrance, CA. I assume it is a minilab because film goes in one end, after an extremely short period of time it comes out the other all done. No issues, great results.

Back when... I used to use Costco. Dev only was $1.84! This was maybe 10 years ago now. Most probably less than that before they pulled the plug. Costco pays its employees well (so no excuse with that). But sometimes my film will come back perfect, other times scratched. I found out why - one of the employees handled everything so carefully wearing cotton gloves. If I got her, my film was great. The other would literally drag the film across the floor as he moved it to where it would be cut and sleeved! Yup, if he handled my film, it would be scratched up. It wasn't that he was doing it deliberately, just that he was careless.

This is what it will take in order to stay in retail business: https://paulsphoto.com/about-pauls-photo. If someone is thinking about working for that sort of business it would be good to ask about that future, compared to the rewards (and risks) of free-lance work.

Is there a genuine upside in this century to retail photo work?

 

[MattKing]

Is there a genuine upside in this century to retail photo work?

Yes, if one finds retail work enjoyable and satisfying, and also enjoys photography.
Unless you are a very rare individual, freelance photography is an awful life.