Truly appalling Truprint processing

[Admbws]

Normally I develop (though not print) my cheap C-41 "snapshot" film at Asda here in the UK. The Fuji Frontier there doesn't seem to scratch negs and the usual guy at the desk seems capable of handling them with a reasonable degree of attentiveness and sympathy.

I've had some rolls of Kodak Gold 200 I hadn't got round to processing, I had picked up one of their (Truprint's) processing envelopes and me being inquisitive and them being cheap sent them off, and asked them to be scanned to CD too, hardly expecting pro results, of course...

I won't bore you with the details but this is one of the few frames that doesn't have two or three long scratches running down it.

Also attached is my quick attempt at scanning the same frame.

 

[Mark Antony]

I think the secret is to find one lab and stick with them, I have a guy who knows me well, cuts my negs into 6's and they never scratch my negs (35 or 120).
The colour is off, but if you send that neg to 20 different labs you'll get 20 slightly different results.
Find a decent lab and give them your money.
Mark

 

[Chris Nielsen]

Sorry to post a slightly off topic reply, but that's an awesome shot there!

 

[railwayman3]

I used Directfoto (of Guernsey) for C-41 mail order D&P for many years with faultless results.
Maybe a couple of years ago, they moved address to Exeter, same name, but presumably absorbed into the Truprint operation (which uses a variety of trade names, e.g. York, etc.), and I have found no deterioration in the quality (and I am critical).
I've not sent any films for two-or-three months, but have some to send at the moment, and will keep an eye on the results.
Maybe it was an isolated problem...still shouldn't happen, and I hope you've complained direct to them.

 

[GeoffHill]

Who would you recommend as a budget processor. Peak are an excellent pro lab, but charge pro lab prices. I shall continue to use them when I need that extra, but I'd like a budget lab for my snaps. Tesco have been doing a really bad job on the last couple of films ive sent to them

 

[railwayman3]

To be honest, I would have recommended Directfoto...will see what they do with my next film.

For E-6 slides, I generally use the prepaid envelopes for the Fujichrome lab (Coventry); they are about as reasonable price as anywhere ...the Jessops E6 envelopes are also exactly the same service and a tad cheaper.
It's also the same service as the process-paid Fuji films (and the Boots own-brand slide films...which are actually Fuji 200ASA...I find these are very good when a bit more speed is needed).

Transpacolor (Leicester) also seem reliable for E6...I've not used their C-41 service, but they do seem to offer a great variety of professional print services.

 

[Ian Grant]

Trueprint have always been awful, I don't think they know what quality control is.

Most pro-labs now use digital minilab equipment for all their 35mm & 120 films. It's really only the skill of the operator and their judgement of when to over-ride the computer, and also the correct replenishment of the chemistry- and even this is automated on most machines.

Ian

 

[Admbws]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

I had figured in the 21st century with todays modern processing equipment they could at least turn out a passable set of prints from one of the most common negative films on the market today. Seems they haven't bothered to calibrate and profile their equipment at all.

I posted this as a warning to others who might consider cheaping out and sacrificing their film to them. The prints have to be seen to be believed. They really do look like shots taken on my grandmother's 110 pocket Instamatic in the 70's - after they've sat in the drawer for the last thirty years and shifted colour.

But the main insult to me is the scratched negatives, where the damage is permanent and irreparable. Presumably they don't bother to perform basic maintenance on their equipment either. Fortunately for me, my snapshots weren't terribly important, but I wonder how many ordinary consumers have had their once-in-a-lifetime memories trashed in this manner?

This type of shoddy processing damages the reputation of film in the consumer consciousness. Could it be a ruthless ploy to push everyone onto digital? Thinking about it, the inside of the film sleeve asks ominously, "Thinking of going digital?"

I'm feeling paranoid now...

 

[pentaxuser]

Conspiracy? No, dont worry, this kind of colour was being produced in the 1970s as you have said, when anything involving the word digital meant using fingers! The expression " old sea-dog" springs to mind but in this print the old sea-dog hasn't found his sea legs yet, judging by the greenery around the gills!

I have only seen my local mini-lab( owner operated)) in operation and in that one the operator watches each "print " for colour and can alter before printing and does a great job as it needs to. Poor prints = poor reputation which spreads and in a small town = out of business.

In chain store operations these constraints don't apply, made worse by the prime directive of profit via high throughput and low cost which translates into poor training and low wages. Pay peanuts and you get monkeys - usually ones who turnover rapidly.

Shouldn't the top management see the sense in preventing this happening? Not if they are governed by the new but key management maxim: Short termism rules OK. There's an upside of course. If companies were properly run there would be no "Watchdog" and the Glitchfinder General, Mr Campbell, ( the Scots are everywhere) would be out of a job and we'd be short of the entertainment of a metaphorical " burning".

pentaxuser

 

[Aurum]

As above, it really depends on the care and attention that they give to the material. In my experience a lab only scratches my negs once, and if they give the usual "Oh not our fault, must be your camera" moo-poo they don't get my business again.

I'm lucky that I have a C41 lab close by (Well 10 minutes walk) that actually "Get it". They get the idea of C41 chromagenic black and white (Unlike the Boots Chain in the UK, who tried to charge me double the C41 rate "'Cos its black and white and that has to have special processing" )
and warn customers who bring a roll of XP2 in that odd tints can be experienced.
They even do 120 roll, which is practically unheard of on the high street.

Only downside is that they don't do E6 slide

 

[srs5694]

But the main insult to me is the scratched negatives, where the damage is permanent and irreparable.

FWIW, I've seen a lot of complaints about scratched negatives on the Web, usually associated with 1-hour labs. My impression is that the roller transport mechanisms these machines use can scratch negatives if they get too dirty, which is an all-too-common occurrence. Of course, this doesn't excuse any lab for producing such results.

As for practical advice, if the scratch is on the base (non-emulsion) side, it can be hidden. I've got a bottle of something called Hide-a-Scratch or No-Scratch or some such thing in my darkroom. It's a brush-on fluid that does a remarkable job of hiding scratches. Rubbing bodily oils (like from your nose) over the scratch can do the job, too, but my own nose oil seems a bit gritty, and the one time I tried it I got specks on the print, so I'm sticking with the commercial product. Of course, treating your negatives this way is a nuisance, but at least it's possible to correct at least some types of scratches if you do your own printing. (I'm guessing the same techniques work for scanning, but I've not tried it.)

 

[Ian Grant]

If you see how negatives are sometimes handled at 1 hr labs you'll realise most damage is done by poor operators, not the machines themselves.

The negatives are processed on one machine and scanned by another, in between the negatives are hung up, waiting. The operator has to handle the film, this is the major source of problems.

Ian

 

[benjiboy]

Worthwhile.

If you see how negatives are sometimes handled at 1 hr labs you'll realise most damage is done by poor operators, not the machines themselves.

The negatives are processed on one machine and scanned by another, in between the negatives are hung up, waiting. The operator has to handle the film, this is the major source of problems.

Ian

We used to say years ago , when I worked in photography that " The only worthwhile thing that could be done in an hour , was making babies "

 

[railwayman3]

Trueprint have always been awful, I don't think they know what quality control is.

Ian

It's odd, really. I, too, have always understood that Truprint were awful.

Yet I use Directfoto with good results (I was particularly delighted with some of a family wedding which I took last year on pro film...the color and details were genuinely better than the work from the professional photographer!).

Just been looking around on the web:-
1) Directfoto C-41 D&P is definitely handled by Truprint at Exeter (from the
Directfoto website).
2) Most reviews of Truprint work say that it's c***!
3) Most reviews of the remaining Directfoto operation in Guernsey (digital prints and mail order bits like SD cards) are critical, to the extent that Trading Standards have been involved!

Have I just been lucky so far? :confused:

 

[Steve Roberts]

Sticking up for Truprint, I've used my local Plymouth shop (near Drake Circus - there are two) for colour neg processing for many years and have never had a problem or any reason to complain (unlike Jessops, who I previously used). I normally go for the 24hr processing, so maybe that's treated differently to one hour - perhaps it's done elsewhere. The staff working away on machines back behind the counter always seem to be wearing cotton gloves and treat the materials they are handling with a lot more reverence than I've seen in "professional" photo establishments. When I've had special requirements for selective enlargements, the very helpful counter staff always call on a printer to have a word about exactly what I want.

On the whole I don't use c/neg for anything too serious, but the last time I used a pro lab I had to deal with a grumpy technician who couldn't get his head around the fact that I wanted the full frames printed (ie no cropping) and charged me over the odds for a pretty indifferent job.

Steve

 

[2F/2F]

If you want something done right...or at least want to know WHY it wasn't done right, do it yourself. It is hard to get mistake-free work, even at a well-reputed lab.

I even have horror stories from one of the most popular and highly recommended labs in the country: A and I. In fact, they have NEVER got any of my 35mm with special instructions right. No problems at all with my medium format and sheet film, or with normally-processed 35mm, but it seems like they completely ignore any special instructions on 35mm.

Well, they didn't ignore them one time...they just pushed the C-41 rolls that didn't need to be pushed, and didn't push the rolls that needed to be pushed...even though each cassette was marked with Sharpie, and they were in separate envelopes. Ruined one of my very first paid shoots. They did give me all my money back without me even having to complain, but fat lot of good that did me trying to explain what happened to the band that wanted their live pix ASAP. I was able to salvage some pix with Ultra Endura paper and some painful printing, but I still had to reshoot...and I did it digitally.

Another paid shoot, for much more money this time, they absolutely failed to push two E-6 rolls two stops. I had not one usable color picture. I did have my home-processed black and whites from the other camera. Thank GOD the black and whites were the main pix of the event, because it was a black and white publication. They only wanted me to shoot color for the heck of it. They used the black and whites and were happy with them. They did a spread and never asked about the color...hee hee. I can't ever count on that much luck any time soon.

In both of these cases, their mistakes were not only obvious by looking at the film, but notated right on the return envelope! I now do all my own personal work in all formats. If it is paid work, I try to use digital whenever possible so I can do everything myself and still have a quick turnaround time with much easier-to-make proofs. In medium or large format, I will go ahead and send it there, but not 35 with special instructions! It's this kind of crap that drives me to want to shoot commercial work digitally.

 

[adrian mctiernan]

You are just exactly saying what I think. Digital is great to be sure, But I think film has the edge for quality still

 

[digiconvert]

I use Max Spielman locally , they process and scan to CD in the hour for £3 and the quality is perfectly acceptable. I have used Transpacolor for C41 and had good results but probably not worth the premium over MS, I have been able to print from negs from both MS and transpacolor, ASDA are OK but Tesco are pretty dire around here.
For E6 I am really pleased with transpacolor, I sent in two slide films , they cross processed the right one and both came back fine.

 

[Brac]

I always found the quality from Asda was excellent as was the price but unfortunately since I moved house there is now no Asda near me. The nearest about 12 miles away doesn't have a D & P operation either. I agree with what's been said about the Truprint mail order operation (I've no idea about any shops they have), you do truly get what you pay for which isn't very much. As far as UK "amateur" D & P labs are concerned the number is decreasing but you can often get reasonable results from the Bonusprint/Doubleprint people, also Club 35 (if they're still around) and Lab 35 were good. But for consistency and price Asda beats them all hands down. If you have one near, you try it. Boots I've never been very impressed with, even though they have a large market share.

Professional labs are much more expensive but I've found Peak Processing in Sheffield and Metro in Birmingham quite reliable. They both often advertise in Amateur Photographer and have web sites. A Google search reveals dozens more than are still in business but I've no idea what the quality is like.

 

[railwayman3]

Further to my earlier posts above, I've just received a 36 exp D&P back from Directfoto, which is definitely a trading name of Truprint (there's advertising stuff for other Truprint services with it).

And I have to stick-up for them....36 spotless prints (Kodak 200ASA film on Fuji Crystal Archive paper), sharpness and colour (outdoor shots in various weather) are all good, and I really cannot find any criticism, other than that the negs are not sleeved.
All at a reasonable price (£5.24, say $11), post paid both ways and a "free" 24 exp. Kodak film.) Postage is 2nd class, so not the quickest, but about 8 days door to door.

Believe me, I am a perfectionist (my wife says a "pain"!) in my photography,
but I continue to be satisfied with them for all general D&P.

(I've no connections whatsover other than an ordinary customer.
And I'll certainly post again here if they let me down in future!)

 

[benjiboy]

The most worrying thing to me is that if you read the small print on the back of the processing slip the high-street labs give you, says that their company's only liability in law is the cost of the customers materials , so if some unsuspecting customer takes in important irreplaceable work, and the company lose it, mess up the processing etc. all the customer gets are replacement films !
I am not a professional, but have been using a local pro lab for more than twenty years where I can take in my films, and collect them myself , I have always been more than happy with their work, they are expensive, but when you consider how much we spend on cameras and lenses I feel that it's false economy to do anything else, because I know I will always get predictable results.

 

[railwayman3]

The most worrying thing to me is that if you read the small print on the back of the processing slip the high-street labs give you, says that their company's only liability in law is the cost of the customers materials , so if some unsuspecting customer takes in important irreplaceable work, and the company lose it, mess up the processing etc. all the customer gets are replacement films !
I am not a professional, but have been using a local pro lab for more than twenty years where I can take in my films, and collect them myself , I have always been more than happy with their work, they are expensive, but when you consider how much we spend on cameras and lenses I feel that it's false economy to do anything else, because I know I will always get predictable results.

Fair point about the liability....it should be drawn to people's attention clearly.
(Some high-street labs do already offer extra insurance at a reasonable small charge.) At the same time, no business is perfect, and perhaps customers
might be expected to use a little bit of common sense if their pictures are once-in-a-lifetime irreplaceable. (I know a documentary producer, who told me that, particularly in the days of film, every shot would be repeated many times, not just to get the best action, but also to cover the times the labs messed up! As he said, the cost of film was negligible at the side of studio rent, staff wages, equipment hire, travel costs and everything else.).

As for so-called "pro" labs, I've had my share of lost films, scratched negs, and expensive Ilfochrome prints that looked worse than my kids holiday snaps (and not all from the same lab). Guess you've just been luckier than me.

 

[srs5694]

The most worrying thing to me is that if you read the small print on the back of the processing slip the high-street labs give you, says that their company's only liability in law is the cost of the customers materials , so if some unsuspecting customer takes in important irreplaceable work, and the company lose it, mess up the processing etc. all the customer gets are replacement films !

I'm in the US, so this may be different in the UK, but I've seen similar clauses on every commercial photofinishing envelope I've used (or at least those I've looked for such things) -- minilabs, store send-out envelopes, and mail-order.

 

[yellowcat]

Trueprint have always been awful, I don't think they know what quality control is.

Most pro-labs now use digital minilab equipment for all their 35mm & 120 films. It's really only the skill of the operator and their judgement of when to over-ride the computer, and also the correct replenishment of the chemistry- and even this is automated on most machines.

Ian

A friend who worked at a lab that was taken over by new management said that he had been told "not to waist time correcting prints, just get the work out".

 

[benjiboy]

I'm in the US, so this may be different in the UK, but I've seen similar clauses on every commercial photofinishing envelope I've used (or at least those I've looked for such things) -- minilabs, store send-out envelopes, and mail-order.

It's the same in the U K, 1 hour photo, mini labs, and mail order usually have these terms and conditions, the point I'm trying to make is if your work is important, it's best not to send it to these places, but to find a professional lab,( one dedicated to processing the work of pros ) first checking their legal liability in case of loss or failure on their part before entrusting your work to them, even then it's no guarantee they won't f***k it up but at least they wont blithely tell you "sorry we've lost/wrongly processed your films, but here's some more films free to replace them.