>>4411869 the lab near me does C-41 35mm for $7 and C-41 120 for $3.75. Black and white and E-6 are more expensive though. I can shoot 645 and scan it myself with okish results, certainty not like super high mp or whatever, but good enough for IG and computer screens
I just mailed off some e6 for $13/roll which is the same as it was 3 years ago. Is OP australian or something? >>4411909 dang that's cheap, I'd shoot lots of 120 gold I gave up onmy local lab after they lost or fucked up several rolls
>>4411869 My local places charged the equiv of five bucks USD for a 36 roll developed but not scanned. $12 all up if you want it scanned too. Same prices for multiple establishments.
>>4411870 Years ago I made my own colour dev chemicals including a diafine style colour dev. Until I wound up using Kodak e6 lab chems and c41 flexicolor and replenishing them at home, was real cheap to replenish
high quality scans are 4 euros on top. If you shoot that much film where these prices become an issue get your own lab and enlarge your photos yourself.
>>4411876 Memphis film lab does $5 developing only and that's mail-in
>>4412066 that's pretty good, my local ones are $14 for the place that has a week turnaround time and $18+ for the others, it's too much. I'd pay $14 if I could get it back the next day
>spend a few hundred dollars on a scanning rig because getting my film scanned at the dev lab doubles the total price >they double dev prices And this is why I no longer shoot film.
>>4424730 I sold $1000 of film camera and lenses over this shit. The labs aren't even consistently high quality anymore. Most of them are pushing enough volume for mistakes to slip through.
Self dev isn't a real alternative. I don't like B&W, and doing it in color is a huge fucking PITA for anything less than carefully planned sheet film shoots.
In the whole film history today's price is not that high. it's rather average price. Last decade had extraordinarily cheap price of films. Of cause all of this is because Cuckdak has been diminished their camera film production since start of 2019 or 2020 if im correct. Don't ask about fujifilm. they are cosmetic chemical company not film company.
>>4431353 For big labs usually it’s cause the automated machines are set up for colour, so they end up doing b/w in a less automated way or just manually.
>>4411869 Yeah. Developed a 120 B&W and 135 color the other week. Just short or $30 for develop & "small" scans.
Motivation for me to learn how to develop Or at least B&W since I understand it's easier to do. Plus I can make use of the bulk loader I bought a while back.
the money isnt the issue for me its being duped into using millenial run "local enthusiast" labs rather than megacorp photo processing as the former have had a single roll of kodak gold for two fucking weeks and the Arasaka of photo developing turned it around in a week, including actually sending the roll off. Fuck small businesses.
>>4424756 c41 is like black and white you only have to watch temps more carefully there's no reason to use labs. labs are scams targeting the mentally challenged and vulnerable (film hipsters)
>>4468260 I don't do it because it doesn't make sense to me, I barely shoot a roll of c41 a color and the chemicals will just go bad and waste unlike my bottle of rodinal that I had since 2015.
>>4468260 B&W is piss easy, just takes time. C-41 is easy, but takes more time and requires a dedicated space. I'm not processing E-6 at home fuck that.
>>4411869 >shoot film because it's better than digital >use lab because processing at home is scary >get scans because meds ran out and the money is tight so buy film instead of mental illness pills film photogs are the most retarded larpers out there. shoot film just to get digital files anyway. lol
>>4411869 skill issue chemistry prices didn't change much I develop, print and/or scan my film myself saved a shitton of money in the long run at least if you shoot quite often
>>4479824 >Shoot myself naked in the mirror every day >Have dedicated camera for this, so only naked shots of me on film >Ilford FP4, develop myself using permanganate/sulfuric acid reversal process >Cut and tape the film strips in a drawing book with bright white sheets >Copy "Sun and Steel" character by character with a black ink brush next to the strips of me.
Call me when I can do this using digital, I want to live a little while I'm here
I've been mixing 500ml batches of chemicals for a while now (measuring half the powder from 1l kits) but I recently found out I can do a roll of 120 or two rolls of 35mm with under 300ml in my rotary processor, so I can get 3 batches from 1l kit or 6 batches from a 2l kit. Measuring and mixing the chemicals is a pain though. I read on some boomer forums that if you freeze the mixed up chemicals they don't spoil. That would be much easier to just mix it up all at once and pull it out of the freezer when I need a new batch.
If I can get 6 batches out of a 2l kit ($53) and maybe 4-5 rolls per batch, I should be able to do $2/roll home processing.
>>4487002 Depends of chemicals but freezing solutions may cause most of water crystallize almost pure and chemicals concentrate to degree of coming out of solution. And getting everything back to solution after thawing may or may not be more difficult than dissolving the original powder from kit was.
>>4487718 Film isn't a meme. Filmfags are meme. Film is an interesting and unique approach to photography that you can't get with digital, and treating it as such can be a nice experience. Being a delusional faggot about "muh film is three billion megapickles" and failing to see the massive convenience of digital is the meme.
>>4487875 This. Film is good. Liking film is good. Other people liking film sucks, those fucking hipster douches. It’s only good when I do it, everybody else is stupid. …*those* hipster douches.
>>4489845 C41 is a standardized process that is uniform regardless of film speed (pushing/pulling aside), while b&w can be done different ways to achieve different outcomes and also requires different timing for different film speeds (unless your lab is doing rodinal stand dev I guess). More complexity = more expensive, while every lab has a machine that basically does c41 for them.
>>4489845 B&W dev is done by hand, and C41 film is done by machine automation. I've seen a moderate rise of C41 B&W film being sold locally this past year or so. Local shop has sold a lot more XP2 Super than even HP5 according to the owner. The film is like an extra two bucks per roll but costs 2/3rd the dev cost at the same store so it's actually more economical.
Besides, think of how much time it takes you to dev a single roll at home. Even if you've done it a hundred times and have all the chems ready to go, it still takes you a good 20-30 minutes to go through everything all the way to drying. I'm not surprised shops are charging $20 USD a roll to have an intern spend a solid half an hour on a single job.
>>4489852 also that's the reason you never give your BW film to a lab because they don't know what look you want and they just use $something. if you shoot BW film you have to develop yourself to keep full control of the process. otherwise you could just get a digicam and shoot the monochrome JPG profile. same amount of control - just less cost.
>>4411869 >started getting back into film since i had piles of expired film i got pre-COVID >development prices all go up Fucking shame. At this point I can understand why there's such a big market for film look presets.
>>4489845 Is it? Some of the labs I go to tended to do B&W a lot cheaper than color, so for a while I was buying B&W for costs reasons.
>>4499319 >be me >upsidedownanon.harness >only dev shops are dedicated camera stores >entire customer base consists of boomers who don't understand ebay and zoomers who bought 35mm pns's instead of an instax >colour dev is $25 minimum >B&W is $30 >"oh wait you wanted scans? That's another $5 anon" >film itself is not cheap either unless you're buying kentmere >fuck this I'm deving at home
>>4499320 We only have those cheap ass development prices in Germany since there's a large company called CEWE which simply won't give up on film development. I guess the magical word for that is cross-subsidization. Otheriwse it would be one big monumental loss.
That's also the only reason keeping me from deving my own films.
>>4487718 I thought it'd be fun to shoot some colour film in my 35mm snapshitter, film cost me 14 euros, develop and scan costs me about 20 euros, that's almost 1 euro per frame. So I made the move to black/white medium format film and learning to dev myself. Which is a fair bit cheaper and more fun.
>>4411869 I took a high school photography class back in 2003 and we all developed our own films and pictures. It's honestly really easy. Just find a small room you can make into a dark room and buy the chems and trays.
>>4423647 >Memphis film lab does $5 developing only and that's mail-in Are they consistent or am I going to send out a roll and have it come back with shifted colors? BTDT
>>4511723 man I can't remember the last time someone replied to a YEAR old post of mine, certainly hasn't been on here probably some other site... anyway, and sorry, I'm drunk so I'm rambling, but anyway yes, in my experience they've been consistent with quality. Not with turnaround time though. was gonna post a sample but all my rolls from there are personal and I don't wanna put them online but I get the medium level scans. Never had a development issue and the scans are fine.
>>4411869 Saw this receipt on ebay from 1988. Cost them 4.55 at Target to get it done. Inflation calculator says thats about equivalent to 13 dollars today.
>>4468259 >develop your film at home. it's so fucking easy it's embarrassing that more people dont do it >i guess it's the consoomercattle mindset hmmm, okay, but there's still the scanning issue so the setup costs significantly more per roll for the first 100 rolls (or more)
>>4411869 Flirt with the woman in snappy snaps and get free photos for life lilenindid. Even got the panoramic prints on their expensive paper. Wish I was a photographer and not just fuckjng about with a camera cause im dating a woman who works in a photo shop.
>>4512336 The one I go to always has a rotating cast of young women and enbies that are presumably also doing a film or photography program at the community college across the street.