What do you generally pay for 135- C41 processing?

[haagen_dazs]

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?

[amateriat]

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

[haagen_dazs]

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! :(

[NL2377]

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. ;-)

[cjm]

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.

[amateriat]

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! :( 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

[ClaremontPhoto]

I'm paying €6 for negatives and HIRES (about 3000 x 2000) scans.

[kully]

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.

[ernstk]

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

[ChrisN]

The local chemist still has a photo lab machine, and the young lady charges me only AUD$2 a roll for develop-only.

[ClaremontPhoto]

That Boots deal sounds very very good.

[dmr]

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. :)

[peter_n]

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.

[cfoto]

$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.

[haagen_dazs]

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

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 ?

[NL2377]

$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.

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.

[haagen_dazs]

You have it easy, I pay $10 for developing a 35mm film. No prints, scans or anything.
which country are you in? where are you located?

[haagen_dazs]

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.

[Anupam]

$2 developed and scanned at the local Woodman's grocery.

-Anupam

[cfoto]

$2 developed and scanned at the local Woodman's grocery.

-Anupam

Wow! (And another Wow, as Wow! was too short to be accepted as a message.)

[cfoto]

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.

Makes sense. Still, I would of expected better results from Kodak. Hopefully the Wal-Mart experience wasn't a fluke. They're pricing was better too. Soon, I hope to start developing my own using true black and white film.

[Ming The Merciless]

I used to pay $16.50 per roll of 36. This included development of the negs and prints. The place closed down anyway. Now for neg developing and a scan of 5 rolls to a CD and NO prints I pay about $9.00. The guy always gives me 5% off. It's a mom & pop place in my neighborhood.

[NL2377]

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.

as long as the lab techs know what they are doing, the risk is very minimal... of course there's always a chance for the processor to fail... wal-mart's processor here fails about twice a month!

We've never had any problems with our processors... though I must say that my boss keeps them quite up to date, and replaces them even before the time is due!

[biomed]

I used to pay $2.00 at a local 1 hour processor for processing only. I never had any scratched film. They more than doubled their price recently. I am going to give our local Costco a shot for $2.09 a roll. I am transitioning back to silver based BW.

Mike

[dazedgonebye]

Target charges about $2 for develop only. Their scans add $4 to the process and have been really bad, so I skip them.

[ian_watts]

Target charges about $2 for develop only. Their scans add $4 to the process and have been really bad, so I skip them.

C41 process only at my local pro lab (http://www.metroimaging.co.uk/prices/C41_prices.asp) costs £5.40 before sales tax (approx. $10 or so). If you want contacts and/or CD scans you can expect to pay another £15-30 ($30-60) per roll!:D

[ElrodCod]

Sam's Club....About $8 for processing, single 3½" X 5" prints and a disc.

[Nikon Bob]

About $3.49 CAD tax in locally for a 1 hour DO, no prints and a CD.

Bob

[charjohncarter]

Costco in California, is about $2.50 (US) to develop (they only do C-41) 135, and $2.99 (US) for a scanned CD. The scan files are 3.5-5 MB jpeg.

[Welsh_Italian]

There's a Fujifilm place in Cardiff that I started using lately. Costs are quite cheap too (for the UK!):

Dev only: £2.49
Dev & prints: £4.99 (I don't use this so cannot comment on the quality of prints)
Dev only & scan to CD-ROM: £4.49
Dev, prints & Scan to CD-ROM: £6.99 (CD's at the time of developing cost about £2.00 extra)

I use this place because I recently put in 15 films for development and scanning and the man there agreed to stuff as many scans onto CD's as possible. I ended up paying £4.49 for 2 lots of dev & scanning, and 13 lots of dev only even though all were scanned! He also does TIFF scanning but those files take up so much room so I stayed with JPG's. Overall, I saved about £26.00! That's enough to go and buy a nice second hand RF... ;-)

Or would do if I wasnt getting married in June because my fiancee would kill me if I bought another camera. It's not like I don't always have the last word in an argument: It's just that those words are, "Yes dear, sorry dear, it won't happen again dear, you're absolutely right dear..." ;-)

[hjfischer]

$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.

I also used Walmart and had developing and photo CD, no prints, for about $4.
The CD provides a good reference for further scanning and printing at home. I did this several times and close inspection of the negs showed no scratches or visible mishandling.

[venchka]

I've tried everyone within a reasonable travel radius from my office & apartment. Walgreens, CVS, Wolf Camera & Wal-Mart. For everyday things, Wal-Mart wins. Good quality. 30 minute service on a slow Sunday morning. Less than $5.00 with tax for 24 or 36 roll film, develop and scan. The scans are small, 1800x1200, but they are fine for now.

I try to stick to 36 exp. rolls to keep the unit cost/neg. down. That means shooting Ilford XP2 Super from Wolf Camera and Kodak Ultra 400UC from Wal-Mart. Nobody in the area stocks Kodak BW400CN in anything but 24 exp. rolls.

If I have something critical to develop, I bite the bullet and go to Wolf Camera for their High Res scans, roughly 4000x3000. That service runs about $20 for developing and scanning. Expensive but the big scans are fabulous. They bring out all the good reasons to use Reala and the DR Summicron.

[nrb]

Development is around €2,00 in Lisbon, but that includes scratches, fingerprints, dust and dirt. €3,00 at Fuji's main street, same service.

[Xmas]

For a dev and scan in 45mins I paid about £2.99 (I think) in Brum city centre, on Sunday previous, 36 exp 35mm.
Scan was pretty low resolution but ok for proofs, the example from 1/3 of the negative
Noel

[venchka]

My local CVS produces 1800x1200 TIFF files on CD. All of my other sources produce 1800x1200 JPEG files. Is there any quality advantage to the TIFF files?

[ernstk]

That Boots deal sounds very very good.

It's not bad, I agree. However, the print quality varies a lot depending on the operator. (Mostly sepia or greenish tint) Also, sometimes I can get high res CD and others, I can't, depending on who is processing the job.

The digital quality is very good.

Ernst

[amateriat]

My local CVS produces 1800x1200 TIFF files on CD. All of my other sources produce 1800x1200 JPEG files. Is there any quality advantage to the TIFF files? To keep it short (for a change): TIFF files are better for image files you're likely to do a fair amount of PS work on. Roughly speaking, TIFFs have a good deal of "extra" (redundant?) data to work with, and as a result suffer less damage when manipulated. JPEG format is designed to be lean while maintaining image quality, but since a lot of "unneeded" data is stripped away in the name of said leanness, is more susceptible to visible digital artifacts from manipulation. This is why all the scans I make at home are TIFFs; I can work them in PS as much as I feel the need to, save the original TIFF, then make a working JPEG copy for whatever purpose (Web, printing, etc.).

I don't get scans made when having my C41 film processed, but if I did, having JPEG scans from the lab wouldn't be a problem since those scans are usually pretty small compared to mine (their 2-3mb JPEGs vs my 210mb TIFFs), and I, like a lot of people here, would use the lab's scans-on-CD as digital proofs rather than finals.


- Barrett

[lynn]

I pay €5 for developing (C41) and scanning-to-disc (plus index print) at the Capi in Schiphol Airport. That's with my Airport Employee Discount.
The scans aren't super, but they're workable.

[mervynyan]

CVS charges $2.50 for negative only
Duane Reade charges $2.29,
plus tax

[haagen_dazs]

The prolab "Taylor Photo" here in Princeton charges (in USD)
bw
36 6.75
24 5.25

c41
36 6.75
24 5.25

that can be double to triple the prices at Walmart, Costco, Target CVS etc etc...
sigh

[Spyderman]

I pay about 2$ or 1.50€ for developing only. The same price for 1 hour C41 or for 4 days B&W developing. And it's one of the best labs in town where the pros get their prints done... but I'm in eastern Europe...

[feyz]

1$ for c41 in... eastern Europe

[haagen_dazs]

$4 at BJ's for a roll of 24 with 5x7 prints.
really?
i got to check that out
that is pretty good..

[VictorM.]

$2.99 CDN for develop and scan at Shoppers Drug Mart at King/Yonge in Toronto. Quality is usually OK.

[haagen_dazs]

if the negs are scratched, can it be eliminated through scanning with the help of ICE? (i know ICE from the Nikon scanner software is meant to remove dust)

[Michael Da Re]

I send all of my film out to Clark Color Labs. For three rolls of 24 ex. I pay $13.44. That includes my negatives, 4x6 prints and having my photo put online to download to my computer and shipping. They also do my c-41 process B/W and they come out very nice. Good prices on enlargements too.

Mike D.

[Nikon Bob]

if the negs are scratched, can it be eliminated through scanning with the help of ICE? (i know ICE from the Nikon scanner software is meant to remove dust)

I don't use a Nikon scanner but my Min 5400 generally cleans up any scratches on the neg when I have the ICE on.

Bob

[ibcrewin]

It cost 2.19 for dev. only on a roll of 24 at Duane Reade across the street from where I work.

It's about $7 for a 36 exp. roll of E6 at the prolab on 31st. I think it's about the same for 120.

[haagen_dazs]

for the american folks...
anyone tried the CVS Photo CD?
how is the quality like? Any comments?

[dostacos]

36 exposure with prints and CD $16.278

[trittium]

$1.75 at walmart, BUT you have to find a good photo center where they don't scratch the negs.

[marbrink]

Many of you are lucky to get processing + scanning that cheap!
The pro lab I usually send out to charge about 12 USD for processing + scanning for about 8mb pics. If you want 20mb they charge twice the price :( The results are very good though, with scratch free negs and good scans.

[akikana]

My local '45min combini' here in Tokyo develop XP2 with pseudo contact sheet in half an hour for 810yen (USD6.82 or GBP3.41). If I want prints it will nearly be double that. No scratches or fingerprints though.

[PATB]

Costco in Mountain View California, 1-hour photo center. $4.00/$6.00 for 24/36 exposure develop and single prints. $3 for CD (24 or 36 Exposures). The CD scans are about 3087x2048 appx 3MB jpegs. No scratches so far.

Here's the weird part -- they still get lots of film business :D

[bensyverson]

$2.50 at CVS... There's a lot of dust and fingerprints, but not too many scratches. ICE seems to get it all.