What do you generally pay for 135- C41 processing?

haagen_dazs

haagen_dazs

Well-known
Local time
4:57 AM
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
878
I saw a similar thread on 120 pricing.
I was curious about what people generally pay for their 135 pricing.

I inquired at CVS today.
For 36exp.
They charge 2.50USD for developing negatives only
10USD for negs and prints
and an additional 2.99USD for images in CD (on top of the 2.50 or 10.00)

i would make sense to just get the negs and go home and scan them in (assuming one has a good dedicated 135mm scanner )

any opinions/ thoughts?
 
Mark,

Here in NYC, the prices you're paying at CVS seem about the norm (here in Brooklyn, my local Rite-Aid charges the same for an uncut, unprinted roll, 24- or 36-exposure).

This, of course, is for film put through a typical minilab roller-transport processor, which, in the right hands, does a better-than-decent job (and the gang at Rite-Aid turn my film around in as little as twenty minutes...this has actually saved me on more than one occasion). If you're more picky, and want your film run through a dip/dunk processor via a pro lab, plan to pay at least double, unless you're pretty tight with the lab and run a lot of film. But I'll go that route on occasion for certain projects...and I have my "favorites" there as well.


- Barrett
 
is dev negs through the minilab processor any different from a dip/dunk done by a pro lab?
that is, is the extra price worth it?

i am trying to find a way to keep costs relatively low since the this hobby is getting very costly at times! :(
 
That's about the same that we charge, too...

barrett, we can do it in 16 minutes... and that's including slight color corrections etc... yes, i did time myself. ;-)
 
I go to CVS and that is what I pay, $2.50 to process and then $2.99 to scan. However, they often have specials. Currently, I believe there is a $1 off promo when you use your CVS card (a free discount card). Also, I think you can get more discounts with the more rolls you have developed.
 
haagen_dazs said:
is dev negs through the minilab processor any different from a dip/dunk done by a pro lab?
that is, is the extra price worth it?

i am trying to find a way to keep costs relatively low since the this hobby is getting very costly at times! :(
Click to expand...
It depends (mainly on the lab).

A dip/dunk processor has two advantages over a roller-transport processor. The first is the amount of surface-contact between film and processor: there's a good deal more physical contact in the case of the roller-transport processor. This is where you're pretty much at the mercy of whoever's in charge of maintaining that machine, including pulling the racks from the processor and hosing them down (I've done my share of working with bog old Kreonites and sparkling-new Noritsus). Even when yu think you're running a squeaky-tight ship, there's always the risk of a roller sprocket jamming or breaking if things aren't kept tweaked (over a year ago, I had three out of four color rolls of a mostly b/w wedding shoot ruined when the r-t processor of a nearby lab "decided" to stop in the middle of a run). The second is the freshness, and number of, water baths (see below).

Dip/dunk processors pretty much work as their name describes: film is loaded onto a metal rack (roll film – 135 or 120 – is wrapped around the rack, while sheet film is clipped in place), in total darkness, then loaded into place for the processor to "grab" and dip into a line of chemistry/wash tanks. The only contact the film has, besides the chemicals, is with the rack itself (and only by the edges, unlike "full-contact" roller-transports).

Why are d/d processors far less common than r-t processors? Size, price and complexity. Sinced the racks have to be loaded in absolute darkness, you need a light-tight space to load them up in, and that requires space. In addition, the tanks, by necessity, are much deeper than r-t tanks, adding further to size. Thirdly, those racks need to be hoisted really high to clear one tank and dip into the next; most d/d processors, as a result, are floor-to-ceiling jobs. Next, while d/d processors are theoretically mechanically simpler than r-t processors, they come with their own set of particulars: tight-tolerance temperature-control for chemistry (especially E6), nitrogen-burst aeration for some chemicals (usually just for E6), extra plubming for fresh water baths (usually more than one...another potential advantage over r-t's), and the need to carefully monitor the process (raise your hand if you survived Kodak's Q-Lab program training). Oh, yeah, price: you could buy a Ferrari for the price of something like a Hostert or Refrema d/d processor; a stand-alone Noritsu roller would cost a fraction of that (the agency I used to work for e-mailed me not long ago about giving me the Noritsu we got, and I was put in charge of, for our in-house work, particularly our coverage of the 1996 Olympica in Atlanta; I turned them down...wouldn't fit in the basement :p).

A note about wash baths: some minilabs have fresh water running in their r-t machines, but most don't. There's controversy about whether this cuts into the archival keeping qualities of color neg film (which otherwise has improved many-fold ove the stuff our parents used). This can be the deal-breaker for a number of people, so my mantra is: Get To Know Your Lab, pro or not.

Now you know much more than you wanted to...

(Edit: while d/d processors are generally stone-reliable, they can have their moments: one time, inthe middle of a run at a midtown pro lab, we heard a horrifying crunching and grinding of metal. It turned out that, somehow, one of the racks ended up "swinging" while being lowered into the bleach bath. The rack caught the dividing wall between the tanks and got wedged between it and the rack transport above...and we had three racks of studio 4x5s going. I had to don night-vision goggles to save what film I could [and see what the hell I was trying to do]. Fun.)


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
I'm currently enjoying free C-41 processing (35/120/5x4) at the local Uni.

However, that will come to an end soon and then it'll be £1.16 for developing at the local CostCo. Their prints are terrible but they're cool to just develop the film and roll it up for me.
 
At my local Boots store (UK national pharmacy chain) I'm paying £7.50 ($15 US) for develop, contact, 6x4 prints and CD output. This is for a 24 hour turnaround time. For a 1 hour service, I would pay approx £2 more.

Ernst
 
The local chemist still has a photo lab machine, and the young lady charges me only AUD$2 a roll for develop-only.
 
A DO/CD costs us$5 and change at Walgreens or us$8 and change at a local pro lab. This is for a 24 roll. Depending on the phase of the moon, Walgreens may or may not charge more for a 36. :)
 
I have been using Motofoto, a franchise chain, recently. $6/36 exp roll. Local wedding photogs use the store. They are scratching the negs at an unacceptable rate. I'm going back to the local CVS at $2.50/36 exp roll or cheaper with my CVS card.
 
$11.00 for 36 exposure negatives, single prints and CD at Wal-Mart 1 hour photo. Here's the strange part... I shot a roll of Kodak BW400CN (Black & white C41 processing) and sent it out to Kodak for developing. Came back in about 4 days. Less than stellar. Very sepia toned. The next roll of BW400CN I shot, I dropped off at our local Wal-Mart for 1 hour developing. They're using a Fuji one hour machine. The prints were stellar. No sepia tones. Very good looking black and white. Negatives looked better, also. I would of expected better results from professional Kodak processing. I got the best results from Wal-Mart.
 
amateriat said:
Now you know much more than you wanted to...
- Barrett
Click to expand...

Thanks Barrett
It was very informative and helpful.
I learnt something today :)

Should i find out what kind of roller transport brand machine these shops use?
ie. are there reliable brand machines to look out for ?
 
cfoto said:
$11.00 for 36 exposure negatives, single prints and CD at Wal-Mart 1 hour photo. Here's the strange part... I shot a roll of Kodak BW400CN (Black & white C41 processing) and sent it out to Kodak for developing. Came back in about 4 days. Less than stellar. Very sepia toned. The next roll of BW400CN I shot, I dropped off at our local Wal-Mart for 1 hour developing. They're using a Fuji one hour machine. The prints were stellar. No sepia tones. Very good looking black and white. Negatives looked better, also. I would of expected better results from professional Kodak processing. I got the best results from Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...

that's actually a common mistake that virtually any lab can make... the kodak bw400cn still has the standard tint of a color film, and therefore can easily be mistaken as a color film. when printing, the printer has to select monochrome in order for the prints to come out true blacks and whites, rather then some variation otherwise.
 
how great is the risk of scratching in using the roller transport process?
is it justifiable to take the risk at the lower dev price of 2.50 USD or is it better to pay more for the pro lab.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom