• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

UK photo labs

pentaxuser said:
What surprised me was a major lab in the U.K's second largest city which is competitive on price, announcing it was closing and it was this that prompted my post
Click to expand...

MattKing said:
A 2 person lab is far from "major".
Click to expand...

pentaxuser said:
The fact that it is 2 man is not relevant to the main thrust of my post. What I think is relevant is what concern we should have in the U.K. about the future of lab processing...
Click to expand...

I think the fact that it IS only a two-person operation is very significant here, especially given the statement that they are competitive on price.

Coming from a large lab background I can assure you that a small color lab operates at a significant disadvantage. It takes a great deal of expertise across different disciplines as well as never-ending attention to detail.

The ideal situation is for a lab to use replenishment, which can reduce chemical costs (per roll) by a factor of roughly 10 times, more or less. But you can't do this with a rotary processor. So you ideally gotta have enough volume to get into a roller transport processor. This, in turn, drastically reduces the "labor" to process each roll - just feed it in vs load onto a reel, etc. But... there is a trade-off - the owner now has to do routine maintenance on the machine, as well as have the skills to troubleshoot and repair problems (or pay for it). And perhaps have a backup plan for when the machine is "down." BTW when using replenished systems one has to learn how to test and troubleshoot the chems. This means, at a minimum, a densitometer along with routine control strips (read Kodak Z-131 to learn about this), and preferably some rudimentary chemical testing equipment.

So where does one get this expertise? Ideally the owner already has it before attempting to operate a lab. Or... they have a day job (to pay the bills) while operating the photo lab at night - a sort of "hobby" business while learning the ropes.

I almost forgot... you'll probably be scanning film, so need a decent scanner and the skills to operate it (as well as have the skills to troubleshoot both it and the computer issues). What about taking orders over the internet? Will you be accepting print orders? (Means you need some sort of pro (?) quality printer and know something about ICC profiles and color management.)

There's more... you have to deal with your effluent. You have to order supplies, as needed. Not only chemicals, but film sleeves, twin-checks, mailing supplies, etc. (hopefully with your lab name and logo). You gotta have a way for customers to contact you with questions or complaints, as well as the customer-service skills to deal with same. Not to mention keeping track of customer accounts as well as all of the accounting information for tax purposes.

So, back to the two-person operation... is this something that one or two people could realistically operate, AND make a living at? Or at least bring in enough income to be satisfied with? I could see struggling with this to grow a larger business - perhaps combined with a studio or a custom framing service, or that sort of thing. But as an ongoing thing? I dunno... will the owners ever be able to take vacations, or even weekends off?

So when a two-person photo lab just closes down? This might just reflect more on the difficulty of running it, while being price-competitive with other local businesses, than it is a reflection on the total local processing business.
 
Last edited:
There is another side. The larger labs here in the UK slowly disappeared, my local lab was established in the early 1980s by an ex Durst UK employee, he'd managed another lab for a couple of years. Durst UK were formerly Pavelle.

So my local lab thrived, servicing local professionals and catering for the mail order wedding & portrait market. By around 2002 they ceased E6 processing themselves and partnered with a Birmingham Lab (18 miles away) who had themselves gone from at least 2 E6 runs a day to twice a week. By 2004 that Birmingham lab had closed as had many others.

Another change had been my local lab used to have 6 roll head printers and dunk dip E6 and C41 lines, with a Fuji optical minilab staffing levels had dropped dramatically, one woman working part-time could print more and faster, they upgraded to a Fuji Frontier minilab. At the same time, they began selling Digital cameras online.

So a small more flexible company like Palm survived, the Pandemic though hit their business very hard, then there has been the issues of Kodak chemistry shortages.

Ian
 
Ian Grant said:
So a small more flexible company like Palm survived, the Pandemic though hit their business very hard, then there has been the issues of Kodak chemistry shortages.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I know nothing about Palm except what I read here.

But it appears that ultimately they did not survive.

I didn't read this thread as carefully as I should have. So now I'm getting the impression that they had been larger (more employees?) and perhaps had been shrinking. (I initially had the sense that it was always a two-employee company.)

In posts 4, 12, and 17, there are indications to the effect that they had had problems with a computer accepting orders, another that their C-41 machine had gone kaput, and they couldn't afford another, and another to the effect that they were in debt but not processing enough film to get out of the debt.

What I was trying to say is that it is very difficult to have only two employees who would have enough knowledge to be able to deal with all of these TECHNICAL issues (as well as doing the production work). And if one is NOT able to deal with them, then it is perhaps not possible to compete, heads up, with other processors in the area. But this doesn't necessarily prove that there is not enough film business in this area, rather it is possible that this particular lab simply could not compete well enough against the other labs in the area.

My view, business wise, is that the most qualified employees should not generally be doing the routine work - this should ideally be done by lower-priced employees. Then the higher value employees can be doing higher value work, etc., perhaps educating themselves in useful areas. Or possibly finding new work, or even creating it.

If one reaches the point where they are out of money (or in debt) it's really difficult to climb out of that. (How do you replace a machine?)
 
Last edited:
Yes I also think the reasons for closing are likely to be for a mixture of reasons some of which we may never know

pentaxuser
 
I don't think the number of workers was the issue, rather it is the lack of film and consistent customers.

M-88 brought up an eye-opening perspective of how the lack of available films during these past years and the quick rush of customers followed by silence are what really affects film labs now. Palm Labs (and like pretty much all labs and stores that sell films) could not meet the demand of film because the supplies were not there.
 
I've used Peak Imaging in Sheffield for a number of years. They've always delivered a good service.
 
I thought I better chip in here to straighten a few things out.

Firstly - and this is something I would have never said until now - Palm struggled for years, this was not a recent decline. I was using them for years before I started Ag (which was originally a retailer with absolutely to interest in being a processing lab) and I always got on well with Steve. But - and he would admit this I think - he wasn't a natural entrepreneur and even back then Palm was struggling and overburdened with debt. We're talking 2006 ish. I used to use Palm in preference to Peter Gaffney because I felt Steve needed my business more.

Fast forward to 2012, Peter wanted to retire - the first person he offered his business to was Palm, obviously. But, for whatever reason they weren't able to do a deal. Peter approached pretty much everyone and I think we were last on the list because we weren't already trading as a processor. I judged it would be a sensible commercial decision to do a deal with Peter, and I was correct as the lab side of Ag has become very successful. I knew Steve had rejected a deal with Peter and it wasn't any sort of auction or gazumping! Steve had been offered, and declined.

Fast forward a bit further to around autumn 2019 and Palm's C41 Wainco dip and dunk packed up completely (note, Wainco went out of business 1991, so this was a seriously old machine). We subsequently handled all of Palm's C41 processing from then until closure, at a discounted price so Steve could make a margin. And shuttled the film back a forth every day in our own van at no charge. Undoubtedly this gave the business life support for the last 2½ years - and was certainly a far cry from the "kneecapping" Ian seems to be suggesting!! Infact the only kneecapping was, really, Steve kneecapping himself with what were some, in my view view, poor decisions that made Palm inefficient and unprofitable. The chemistry issues and poor supply recently of 35mm colour film are really peripheral issues, albeit important ones.

We're genuinely sad to see Palm's doors close.
 
All interesting info on small operations. My preferred mini-lab is an Afga D-lab operated by one woman....who has been processing film long enough to remember the introduction of C41. She also performs a lot of maintenance on her machinery, diagnosing failed parts, replacing them herself or knowing when to call in an engineer. She's often to be seen with her hand inside the machine adjusting or repairing something. It's not an easy job for sure. Additionally she has skills in scanning, retouching, editing and making "fun" items such as coasters, calendars etc. It is a labour of love for sure. Plus, though it's not really her job, she handles some sales in the camera shop. Definitely requires multiple skills in various disciplines.

I tried Ag a few years ago when I was searching the best solution for my own needs and the *only* reason I haven't continued is postage costs. Thoroughly good service. I'd also suggest Nik and Trick down in Folkstone who I used during lockdowns when my local lady wasn't working. You'll pay postage but they do E6, B&W and C41 all by hand and know what they're doing. The folks at Analogue Wonderlab seem very enthusiastic but I haven't tried them yet.
 
Matt5791 said:
I thought I better chip in here to straighten a few things out.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the fresh outlook on the situation. It makes some things more clear, to me at least.



Yes, and a person like that can have a lot of value. To my earlier points, even better would be two people like that, but say that one is more specialized in, for example, the chemical processes, and the other specialized in the mechanical and electrical aspects of the machines. They're likely to be more capable than a single person. But then, to carry this farther, why have such qualified people doing the more mundane work? And so on. So my view is that a lab, if in direct competition with others, ideally has to grow to some size to allow the more routine work to be done by lower-priced employees, etc. If there's no local competition then it's a different situation - less pressure to meet a price point.
 
Matt5791 is right, it was the professional labs that were hit the hardest first, as the smallest in Birmingham professional they lasted the longest. I used Colin Alford for decades or my local lab, but these were pro-labs with almost no amateur clients.

I also used Peter Gaffney/ later Metro for my C41 snaps for many years from 1986. Peter was processing for other camera shops and outlets
A contracting market is vicious, sometime the best go first. I no longer have a lab I'd use within a 30-min drive (outside rush hour), for my LF E6.

Ian
 
Ian Grant said:
Matt5791 is right, it was the professional labs that were hit the hardest first
Click to expand...

And the sad part is that the volumes that the professional labs used to enjoy were an integral component of their ability to maintain their high quality, professional standards.
Mundane practicalities like the floor space they occupied (= high commercial rents) and the electrical demands of high volume processing machinery (= big electricity bills) probably brought down the first ones who closed.
 
Talking about Birmingham (UK) there was one very large lab that pioneered early Colour photography, I'll have to dig out my 1940s D A Spencer "Colour Photography - In Practice". Dr Spencer himself had pioneered the Vivex process, a Tri-colour wash off relief process that had 90% of the UK pro market for a few years.

Spencer was later a senior research chemist, director, and large shareholder of Kodak Ltd, here in the UK.

Ian
 
I don't think so Tom. There's a bit about the Vivex process in the 3rd edition, 1948, of Colou Photography in Practice. Spencer joined Kodak Research during WWII, the Vivex process ceased in September 1939, in 1957 Spencer was appointede Managing Director of Kodak Ltd

The very large Birmingham laboratory was called CPL, the parent company Colour Processing Ltd was based in Edenbridge, Kent, with two labs in London, one in Bristol and another Chorley. lab in they were originally called Colour Photography Ltd, later.

Ian
 
My copy of Coote's Colour Prints, 1963, Revised Ed, indicates there was still work on tri-colour systems in the U., by a company McGraw, Clorgraph Corporationalso mentioned by Spencer in 1948. Coote includes all he formuae for te Vivex process.

Iteresting that D A Spencer was seconded to Kodak Ltd Research by the RAF, all British film and paper cmanufacturers were taken under the cotrol of the Air Ministry after the outbreak of WWII,

Ian
 
I'm curious as to what actually fails in an old dip and dunk machine? surely a piece of a equipment of that age is never truly irreparable. Cost and time are of course the main factors, but with modern CNC, 3d printing (in all its forms) and one off prototype houses providing these services I would have thought most things could be fixed. I have a small workshop with small manual lathe, mill, fdm and resin printers and often fix odd things around the house and for friends by making new parts. Of course my time isn't taken as factor in these but even if were, the cost compared to replacement or simply scrapping an item surely could be worthwhile.
 
Steve906 said:
Of course my time isn't taken as factor
Click to expand...

And if you do, those small proto-shops turn out to be not so cheap a solution after all. Try justifying let's say a 3000 quid repair on a machine by running some rolls of C41 through it per week. While already being in debt when starting out, of course.
 
Don't know where you get £3000 from, and I did say "Of course my time isn't taken as factor" when talking about home and friends repairs! and being in debt to start with is not relavent to what I was asking when I said at the start I am curious as to what actually fails?!
 
The thread was about UK labs, one lab in particular, which was in debt already when their machine broke down. Hence the comments. The 3000 might also have been 1000 or 10000 without alteration to the argument. Of course, friends & family repairs are great if you're an amateur and I suppose we all go there from time to time given the kind of hardware we use, but it's not always a feasible route for commercial labs, which was the matter of debate.
 
Dip and Dunk processing lines require a lot of floor space (= high rent), a lot of HVAC, a lot of electricity and a fair bit of regular maintenance. All of which means they are expensive to operate.
 
In theory, a dip and dunk processing machine should be easier to repair than say a minilab processor.
The mechanics of a dip and dunk are fairly easy to understand and should be easy to repair with the right parts but the making of parts could be expensive (unless you have the knowledge and equipment).

I would imagine the electronic control section of these machines could be the big problem. If 20 or 30 years old, getting the correct circuit board parts or replacements could be difficult.

I remember in around 2014/15 trying to get replacement circuit boards for a Fuji minilab C41 processor. It wasn't so easy and the installation was tricky as the whole program memory was in a chip that could fail if the backup battery was low.

As with all these type of repairs, where there is a will, there is a way. If often depends on how much that "will" costs financially and time wise.
 
I use Ag for most films, really easy processes and turnaround good. I've had too many results from Harman (Ilford) which are either scratched, or have hanging clip holes through the last frame.
I've recently bought some hand-rolled medium format Kodak Vision3 (IMAX film) from a seller on eBay, and after shooting sent it back for their remjet clean and ECN2 processing. The negs came back and I was pleasantly surprised. Like I say they are only on eBay and I would assume a kitchen sink affair but their name is rl_processing. https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/rl_processing
 
Correction: they have a website: https://www.rlfilmprocessing.co.uk/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register