Cost per Image, is it too much?

[brachal]

I was dropping off some film at my local lab yesterday, and there was a fellow next to me complaining loudly about the lab's price for processing ... especially black and white. It's a pro lab, but they don't do their own black and white anymore. The machine broke and they don't do enough volume to justify repairing or replacing it, so B+W gets outsourced.

Anyway, he got me thinking. I pay $10/roll to have my film professionally processed and scanned. I pay about $3/roll for the film itself. It works out to about 35 cents an image. I shoot 4 or 5 rolls a month, so my annual cost is between $600 and $800 for film and processing. I can afford it, so it doesn't bother me, but I can see how it might be a problem for some people. On the other hand, I'd have to use an M8 for 6 years before it'd pay for itself with avoided processing $$$, so I guess I'll keep using my Bessa and IIIf. 🙂

I guess I'm just wondering if anybody else has had similar thoughts or reservations lately. Anybody?

 

[mfogiel]

10 USD per roll of film professionally processed and scanned is laughable. It would cost you something like 25 EUR for low resolution scans, and at least 100 EUR for high resolution scans in Europe. In any case, I think you probably end up spending many times more in coffee and cigarettes in a year... Those who complain about film processing costs, should stick to using digital, except that I yet have to see somebody who has not replaced his digi camera after 2 or 3 years of use, so the savings are not that impressive...

 

[MartinP]

Being silly about it, you can shoot and process approximately five times as much film, for less than half the cost, at a higher quality, if you do it yourself . . . .

😉

 

[david.elliott]

To save money, I will start developing my own film after finals (mid May). I already do my own scanning.

🙂

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I replaced my Canon 10D, which I bought new for $2200 after over 70,000 frames. I think that works out to three cents a shot. Seems pretty cheap to me.

 

[dcphoto]

bill... where are you sending your film for processing and scanning?

 

[brachal]

bill... where are you sending your film for processing and scanning?

Lakeside Camera Photoworks in Metairie, LA.
www.lakesidecamera.com

 

[Al Kaplan]

There are ways of cutting black and white costs WAY down. Buying 100 foot rolls of Tri-X and doing your own cassette loading is a major saving, and buying "movie" film like Eastman Double-X Negative type 5222 (ISO 250) can cut costa even more. Developing your own negatives is cheap and easy, and it doesn't take much in the way of either hardware or skills to make contact sheets from your negatives.

Out-of-pocket for a roll of film, self processed and a contact sheet, should come in between two and three dollars a roll, and maybe less.

 

[feenej]

I pay $4 for processing and low res scans for color film, so $10 seems steep to me. In this day and age, it must be hard to find any lab that even does traditional b&w, so that makes $10/roll a bargain. I guess. I do my own.

 

[Jason Sprenger]

At this point, I'm more worried about availability of quality processing than its cost.

 

[emraphoto]

the film trick is buying bulk. bulk film, bulk chemicals etc. the last batch of film i purchased was 100 rolls of efke and it ended up running me about $1.54 a roll after shipping. i never figured the cost of developing as it's a more a time issue for me.

 

[David William White]

At this point, I'm more worried about availability of quality processing than its cost.

It's so dead easy to process black and white, most regular shooters do it themselves, so labs just don't get the business they used to.

I agree with Al that the costs plummet when you bulk load and develop yourself, and there is nothing like the feeling of having a few long rolls of film in the fridge.

If we want to keep our cameras clicking, we just need to do a few simple things to guarantee we can -- stuffing some long rolls in the fridge, and learning how to develop. Then we're not at the mercy of available services.

 

[jwhitley]

FWIW, I started souping my own B&W simply to have control of the process. Just as I can choose a film for a desired result, I choose a developer and processing time (push/normal/pull development) suited to that roll (or sheet for 4x5). I'm certainly not complaining about the cost savings, either.

 

[photogdave]

My developing costs don't include scanning because I have a scanner bought and paid for from a long time ago. So by my calculations I can shoot film at my average pace for 15 years before I've spent the cost on an M8.
That's without factoring IR Cut filters, spare batteries, extra memory cards, DVDs and hard drives for backup, Photoshop plug-ins....

 

[Sisyphus]

If I am in pinch, there is a woman in my area, that will process film only, for $12.00 per roll; anything additional services including contact sheets will cost more. She is the go to person for processing b&w film. She used to process and print film for magnum photographers when she lived in NYC.

So, I think $10.00 is quite reasonable. I have not used her yet, but have been thinking about it since I have a lot of film.

I hope that helps.

:s:

 

[brachal]

If I shot B+W, I would probably learn how to process it myself. My wife has offered to teach me a couple of times. All the other demands on my time might make spending time in the darkroom a problem, though. I shoot color about 95% of the time, and find that Kodak CN B+W (c41 process) is more than adequate for me when I want B+W.

 

[ludoo]

10 USD per roll of film professionally processed and scanned is laughable. It would cost you something like 25 EUR for low resolution scans, and at least 100 EUR for high resolution scans in Europe.

Seeing as we both leave in the same city, drop me a PM as the minilab I use charges me 6 euros for a 36 exp roll, C41 processing and low-res (2000x1500 or slightly smaller, can't remember offhand) scanning which works great for web use, all on a brand new machine. I drop the film in the morning and pick it up at lunch.

As for B&W, I started developing it on my own to lower costs. I pay film 1.20 each bought in bulk (20 rolls of Rollei Retro / Agfa APX 100), and using Rodinal/Agefix etc. I spend about 1 euro or slightly less for development. Then I scan with an old canoscan 2700F. At around 6 cents each negative it can't get much cheaper than this. I will probably start doing contact prints soon to have something on paper too, and costs will rise a tiny bit.

Doing the math for color, I picked up a couple dozen rolls of Fuji Reala 100 which expire next Semptember for 1.20 each (looks like a standard price for film bought in bulk around here), so 1.20 + 6.00 for developing/scanning gives me a cost of 20 cents for each negative.

 

[splitimageview]

I replaced my Canon 10D, which I bought new for $2200 after over 70,000 frames. I think that works out to three cents a shot. Seems pretty cheap to me.

That's only the cost of the camera. What about the computer, storage, and all the other factors?

 

[bucks11]

I think the processing prices of B&W are becoming ridiculous, so I started my own a couple of months ago. Of course, I had to buy a scanner, tank and accessories, and bulk loader. But by saving 50% on film costs and nearly 90% on processing i think it will pay off pretty quickly.

 

[martin s]

Exactly, buying 30,m+ rolls of bulk film will really cut down costs. Rodinal 1+50 (or even 1+100) will cost virtually nothing and you can buy fix in 5l tanks as well. If you don't print an Epson Scanner will do, I think all in all it's still quite affordable. I'd lower coffee consumption first, which is probably more than I pay for film.

martin