Economics - Film/Dev/Scan

[gregg]

I hope this is the right place for this post/discussion. I've recently been shooting a lot of color and C-41 B&W films and having them processed and scanned locally. Given that I'm at 10-15 rolls per month I figure I'll be racking up 300 rolls or so over the next two years.

My scanner works fine (Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II) but is on the painfully slow side. I'm not afraid of the darkroom and do quite a bit for my 8x10 work. Processing 35mm is a snap and is about $1 per roll or less, but the scanning with the Minolta takes SOOOOOO long.

I've used a friends Nikon Coolscan 5000 recently with the roll feeder and it is super fast and good. I would like to get one of these setups, so here is the beginning of my justification... Please find below a little spreadsheet exercise I ran to find my break-even point. It looks like 306 rolls is the magic number.

As you can see the C-41 option incurs a fixed price: 9.27 per roll with XP-2 and WalMart processing/scanning.

Of course there are other less expensive scanner options other than the Nikon/Rollfeed option. The Epson 700/750 looks like a decent choice for web and 8x10 prints and has a break-even with C-41 at around 110 rolls.

No conclusions yet for me, just a consideration. It really comes down to economy of scale, convenience and how much I love the look of "real" b&w film...

Rolls            100        250         306       100         250
Film           Tri-X      Tri-X       Tri-X      XP-2        XP-2
Film Cost      $3.69      $3.69       $3.69     $4.69       $4.69
Process     B&W Home   B&W Home    B&W Home  Dev/Scan    Dev/Scan
Dev Cost       $1.00      $1.00       $1.00     $4.58       $4.58

Scanner/    $1,399.00  $1,399.00   $1,399.00     $0.00       $0.00
Feeder

Film Cost    $369.00    $922.50   $1,129.14   $469.00   $1,172.50 
Dev Cost     $100.00    $250.00     $306.00   $458.00   $1,145.00 
Price/Scan    $13.99      $5.60       $4.57     $0.00       $0.00 

Total      $1,868.00  $2,571.50   $2,834.14   $927.00   $2,317.50                               
Cost/Roll     $18.68     $10.29       $9.26     $9.27       $9.27

 

[Kin Lau]

Q1: Why are you scanning all your negs?

Q2: Depending on the answer to Q1, would a digital contact sheet do? If so, how about something like an Epson 4990 that can scan 8x10 transparencies. You can do 24 (with the holder) or 36 (contact sheet style) in 1 scan.

 

[dmr]

Q1: Why are you scanning all your negs?

Q3: Do you consider the value (in $$$) of your time in this equation?

I really never intended to have the scanner replace the CD from the lab. I still pay the few $$$ to have the CD done. Why? Because I value my time, and I know if I would skip that CD, I would never get a good look at many of my shots, since I would scan only those I thought I wanted a nice print of. Even using the batch mode, it takes time to load the film, drive the computer, etc.

For casual viewing, small prints, web, e-mail, etc., the CD scans are fine.

However, having that scanner has shown me that much better scans and prints can be made with a hi-res scan and a little attention to detail.

I find I end up making nice prints of only 5% or so of what I shoot.

I find that the cost of the film and the cost of processing are the most significant costs of my hobby. Film goes anywhere from $1 (current W/A 200 close-out) to several $$$ per roll (Kodachrome, Velvia, Fuji 1600) and the price for DO/CD processing seems to be very consistent at $5 and change for negative film, a bit more for slides (which I do not have the lab scan), or to have the DO/CD done by a real photo shop, which I do for important stuff.

Since I print only a fraction of what I shoot, I don't really consider the cost of the paper or the lab print to be that significant.

And since I'm immune to GAS { LOL, ducking, running } I don't really consider the equipment cost to be a major factor in this equation. {Looking for a place to hide.} 🙂

 

[gregg]

Good point Kin Lau re: the "digital contact sheet" idea. I've just been making low-res scans of everything. I do have a Epson 2450 that can do 12 frames at a time... It is just so terrible for 35mm I never considered it.

The value of time is a consideration. I generally spend a fair amount of time in the office each day so throwing some negs in the scanner isn't a big bother.

As for GAS - my budget for anything but consumables is almost tapped. Having well planned ROI for long-term expenditures is usually a plus.

 

[RayPA]

I agree that a flatbed may be your best option. Even my cheap (price-wise only) Epson 4180 can scan twice as many frames during a scan as my "expensive" KM 5400 II. I also wouldn't downplay the quality of newer Epson flatbeds for 35mm scanning.

I would avoid the one-hour lab scan-to-disk option. I think that option is fine for tests or images you're not really serious about, but I've scanned rolls of film that had been through the rigors of a one hour lab scanning process and they were all scratched.

🙂

 

[matt fury]

Maybe another option you didn't consider: get your film dev/scan somewhere else. I only pay $5.50 for process + cd @ Walgreens, and I think their prices are about the same everywhere.

 

[nightfly]

Personally price isn't such a consideration. I need to control my own development and scanning in order to be satisfied with my images.

Basically though, I'm only scanning a couple of images per roll. I usually develop, cut and put in sheets, scan the whole thing on my Epson 4990 at 300 dpi, bring the scan into Photoshop and zoom in and use it like a lightbox.

Then I scan the few I like at much higher resolution. Really doesn't take too much time.

But I hate C-41 film and don't think I'd like anyone else developing my Neopan 400 either so it's not really a choice.

 

[willie_901]

Gregg.

I think your cost estimates are too high.

If you like the scanner you will keep it at least two years. So the yearly cost is the 1/2 of the purchase price. After two years the scanner will still be worth at least $400. This reduces the yearly price as well

If you bulk load Tri-X you can cut the film cost significantly. I pay $36-$40 for a 100 foot roll. I develop at home too. But I don't think it costs $1.00 per roll (D-76 is less than $8.00 a packet)


My C-41 development costs $7.44 a roll with high-res scans. I am lucky to have a great Camera Shop Lab nearby. Walgreen's charges $5.50 a roll for 1 Hr. developing with medium-resolution CD, but the negative quality is erratic.

I buy most of my C-41 film at local camera shows and on-line. The rest (special occasions) I buy at camera shops. I pay $3.00 to $7.00 per roll. I'm sure my average is less than $5.00 per roll.


good luck with your decision

willie

 

[Ted Witcher]

I haven't found a reasonable solution to making pictures. I pay $10 per roll for developing, a contact sheet, and a CD of high-res scans at a lab here in L.A. I consider this a good deal (in fact, the guy takes a hit on a per unit basis but makes it up in volume), but it does add up. I do minimal work on the keepers at home and I'm ready to print. If I think something could be really good and is beyond my PS abilities, I'll front for pro retouching at whatever the rate is (around $100 an hour I think). That's film. The digital thing doesn't have the frontside expenditures but you pay for it in time on the post end. Plus I'm not convinced yet I can get the look I want without further, more serious expense with a pro who really knows PS. Wish I had an answer to this question. I guess I'm at about $16 or so for film (Fuji), dev, and good scans. About as low as you can find, but it definitely adds up.