Cost of self-development vs Lab for B+W

[shadowfox]

Here in 2007 where digital almost obliterated film, the cost of sending a roll of B+W film to a lab has gotten ridiculous.

I have to pay $5.50 to develop (no cut, just develop) a roll.

Now I am consider developing B+W rolls myself out of curiosity and if it's cheaper per roll, that's marvelous.

So, my question is, in your experiences, how much does a roll of film cost if developed in your own darkroom? and which developer are you using?

[fidget]

Just as a beginner, using ID11, I was wondering this myself. I frequently dev several rolls at one time. I always use the "one shot" developer more than once at each session. I use 1:1 mix at the moment and reuse the dev up to twice with other films (often test films). Only factoring the dev costs and leaving out the purchase of tanks etc, I reckon that a film will cost 50 to 90 cents to develop. But this only holds if you don't let the stock developer go off with age.
It's not only fun, but you can achieve a better job that the labs, you have the control! (after you've messed a couple up).

[santino]

no lab ever developed my b&w film correctly.

[kaiyen]

Yeah, I think even if you factor in the costs of all the chemicals - fix, permawash, and photo-flo in my case - along with developer, plus some ridiculously amortized amount for supplies, beakers, etc, it's like $1 a roll. Maybe $1.50. I charge my friend $2.50, the difference being for time.

allan

[davidbivins]

I use Diafine, which lasts close to forever, as a developer. Doing a back-of-napkin calculation, I probably spend less than 25 cents a roll to develop. All the "fixed" costs of the tank and stuff weren't amortized into this, but that's a one-time cost. I buy new fixer and hypo as needed at a few bucks a pop every several months, the jug of photo-flo I got has lasted a couple of years already, etc.
I develop at least 4 rolls a week at home during the cold months. During the warm months, I sometimes develop 6-10 a week.
The bigger cost is the archiving materials - which you have to buy anyway wherever you get your stuff processed (unless you just use their sleeves and recycled shoeboxes or something).

[DavidH]

I roughly calculated my C41 dev costs the other day at about £1 a roll - and that's using low volume (hence more expensive) kits. B&W is much less - even using DDX I'd guesstimate around 50p or 60p a roll.

Go on Shadowfox - dev your own - you'll never look back!

[markinlondon]

The startup costs of equipment will be paid off in about ten to twelve rolls at that price. It costs me around 50p a roll using ID-11, less with HC-110 including an archival sleeve. A lab would charge me about £7 to do a far worse job. The only way to go with traditional b & w is to do it yourself.

[Xmas]

Rodinal at 1:100 goes a long way.
Water as intermediate rinse is cheap.
If you use the expensive fast fixer, in two baths and discard 1st bath when exhausted, this is the big cost factor but still cheap. If you buy the hypo powder and still use two bath you have to use more water for washing, but cheaper then the fast fixer.
You tie up a washroom while the film dries.
The only possible problem is disposal of exhausted hypo if you have a septic tank, you need to take it to envir friendly disposal, or try recovering the Ag.
The big cost is the time but it is more exciting than watching 'sex in the city' sorry Joe...

Noel

[traveller]

At the moment I am testing Tanol, a staining developer. About 35-40 c (European)/film. Stop and fixer, let's say about 20 c/film. A little bit of demineralized water to dilute Tanol and for the last wash, water for washing.

Starting equipment will be paid after the first 6-7 rolls and the quality you will get is way better than what you will get from the lab

When do you start?

[shadowfox]

Gosh, so many good answers...

The reason I even considered this aside from being curious and want to save money, is that I just discovered a "hidden" local film store that still stocks chemicals (both film and developers) at a reasonable price.

Now I just have to convince my other half to let me use the bathroom upstairs (no windows) once in a while.

So from your answers, it looks like more make sense to develop several rolls at the same time (to save chemical and time).

Let's say I'll start with Diafine, which from what I read is a no-brainer developer for ex-digital weenie like me.

What is the reasonable number of rolls that I need to pile up to be developed together?

[kaiyen]

remember that you only need darkness for loading the tank, and you can do that in a changing bag. Might be easier to convince your other half if you don't actually need to "take" over a room for its darkness. You can load anywhere, then develop in daylight wherever is convenient.

With diafine, develop as few or as many as you want. No need to stockpile beforehand.

allan

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by kaiyen

remember that you only need darkness for loading the tank, and you can do that in a changing bag. Might be easier to convince your other half if you don't actually need to "take" over a room for its darkness. You can load anywhere, then develop in daylight wherever is convenient.

With diafine, develop as few or as many as you want. No need to stockpile beforehand.

allan

Of course! thanks for waking me up

[Solinar]

Originally Posted by Xmas

Rodinal at 1:100 goes a long way.

Noel

And if it is the 250ml bottle, it seems to go on forever, up to 50 rolls of film.

[mwooten]

Originally Posted by kaiyen

remember that you only need darkness for loading the tank, and you can do that in a changing bag. Might be easier to convince your other half if you don't actually need to "take" over a room for its darkness. You can load anywhere, then develop in daylight wherever is convenient.

With diafine, develop as few or as many as you want. No need to stockpile beforehand.

allan

As Allan said, you only need to load the film into the developing tank in darkness. I use a walk-in closet at night. My chemistry, stop & fix, is stored in quart size milk bottles, and I use one-shot Ilford liquid developer. Time is the only thing that is hard to price. It seems to take me about a half of an hour to develop a tank of film. That includes loading the tank, the development, and cleaning up the bathroom. The film hangs in the shower to dry, and the next morning I cut it and put the film into the sleeve pages.

Having just said that time is hard to price -- when you develop your own film you are getting into the magical realm of craftmanship. I feel when you perform an act of craftmanship, then time has no real meaning. You want to do it the best you can at that moment.

Take care,
Michael

[VitoGuy]

What are you guys doing once your film is developed? Do you scan into a computer? 'Print' with an enlarger?

Cheers!

[Bryan Lee]

If your just counting money thats the easy part. In my case a fingerprint on a negative or just careless work from the half baked dude in the darkroom at some lab could ruin my image. How much is it worth to know that after a image is exposed that you remain directly involved throughout the remaining process to insure the image is correctly developed? If my stuff has a fingerprint on it then its my fingerprint.



A good drying cabinet, water filters, archival type washer, and temperture controls, are other important factors to consider depending on where you are.

[JCT]

Originally Posted by VitoGuy

What are you guys doing once your film is developed? Do you scan into a computer? 'Print' with an enlarger?

Cheers!

I use both approaches --- I usually do not develop and print on the same days (too claustrophobic in the converted darkroom). Sometimes I will make a quick digital proof sheet to eyeball for composition (my V700 will scan 6 6x6 negs at a time) -- also lets me email shots to my photographer sister for critiquing or printing advice.

But I still make old-fashioned proof sheets and I definitely print my own -- it is a ton of fun.

JT

[Solinar]

Originally Posted by VitoGuy

What are you guys doing once your film is developed? Do you scan into a computer? 'Print' with an enlarger?

Cheers!

Mostly print in the claustrophobic converted darkroom with the radio blaring. For me scanning is like watch paint dry.

[emraphoto]

b+w development IS fairly cheap at home... bulk rolls and bulk film purchases also help drive down the cost. the only things i bought at an actual "camera shop" (and i use that term loosely) were chemicals, and tanks. everything thing else was wal-mart. cheap! i pick up film of the ole BAY (mitsubishi 100 aka efke up 100 for $1.54 cnd a roll shipped to my door) and away i go. i reckon about two bucks a roll for purchase AND development.
after the neg's are developed i scan... a whole other can of worms. it will take you a while to get your development process down to a routine (agitation times, develpment times, temps, developers etc.) and when you finally figure all that out it's on to scanning. scanning is tedious and a frustrating process at first. bad scanning technique, hell even pretty good scanning technique can produce a pretty "muddled" image. do some reading, prepare yourself to do a lot of it and when reading reviews on potential scanners DO NOT IGNORE the "scanning time" section. most figure a slow scan time is "acceptable"... well a slow scan time for a dozen or two neg's can be a real chore.
but after all that's said... i believe with some simple math my epson 4490 and a 35mm neg = a 22 megapixel (or so) camera. AND you have so much more control over a lot of elements when you develop at home.
cheers and have fun
john

[emraphoto]

ps... i scan and print via the ole cs as darkroom printing is a SERIOUS craft that requires a LOT of trial and error. respect to all the wet printers out there!!!!

[Tom A]

Originally Posted by shadowfox

Here in 2007 where digital almost obliterated film, the cost of sending a roll of B+W film to a lab has gotten ridiculous.

I have to pay $5.50 to develop (no cut, just develop) a roll.

Now I am consider developing B+W rolls myself out of curiosity and if it's cheaper per roll, that's marvelous.

So, my question is, in your experiences, how much does a roll of film cost if developed in your own darkroom? and which developer are you using?

I do make my own developers ( only time a degree in clinical chemistry has paid off). The basic source book for this is Steve Anchells " Dark Room Cookbook" and once you get into it, you can start modifying processes and chemistry to suit your shooting style. Only part that I still buy as "store" product is
the fix as I hate making it from powder.
If you buy in bulk ( Sodium sulphite, carbonate in 10 lbs bags, metol or Phenidone in 1 lb cans as well as Hydroquinone in 1lb cans) you cut your film developing cost to pennies. Calculating with the fix it costs me about $ 0,80 to do 5 rolls. I go through 450-550 rolls a year so the developing cost is minimal compared to the cost of film.
I you restrain yourself from getting fancy and stock up on the basics you can also make vastly improved paper developers from much the same chemistry. Mass produced developers have to be manufactured for packaging and storage while if you make them from scratch you dont have to worry about that. Only expensive part that you need is a digital scale, the rest is basic stuff.
Most of the stuff is non-toxic (reasonably so!). In the "good old days" people used ingridients that makes you wonder how we ever coined the term "old photographer"!
Ilford makes a great developing agent "Phenidone" and it is quite potent as well as being non-allergenic. One of the developers that I mix is called PCK and it uses 0.3 grams of Phenidone in 500 ml of the A stock bath. That is enough to develop 30 rolls of Tri-X so a lb of it will last a long, long time. The other components are Vitamine C powder ( ascorbic acid) and Kodalk. The formula was concocted by Patrick Gainer " unblinking eye.com" and it is very similar to D-76/ID 11 with similar times and slightly better grain.

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by VitoGuy

What are you guys doing once your film is developed? Do you scan into a computer? 'Print' with an enlarger?

Cheers!

Whoa, I wouldn't even dream of operating an enlarger, that's too much for me hats off to y'all darkroom-jockeys

I do use a film scanner and do all post-processing digitally, so really what I need to do is just the development of the film into negatives... and you guys made it sounds so simple, I guess I just have to take the dive

[JeremyR]

I am now considering self-development as well, as development in a lab can easily add up to around $7 per roll (given surcharges for push processing, etc.). It's also more than a little bit out of my way.

It sounds like some of the chemistry can have a long shelf life indeed. Based on what I've read here, it sounds like it would be more economical to self-develop, even for a relatively low volume of perhaps 1-2 rolls/month. Does the math actually work out? For relatively infrequent developing, is there anything I should be aware of concerning longevity of chemicals?

Cheers,
Jeremy

[NickTrop]

Has anyone used York Photo for black and white prints? Yes, I like to develop and print. But sometimes there's a backlog, especially with printing. It's hard to keep up with it. Although they only do 135 (not MF):

6x4: $1.95 for 24 exposures, 3.15 for 36
5x7: $4.95 for 24, 6.97 for 36
black and white is $1.50 extra for processing
shipping and handling is $1.30 per roll.

So, a roll of 24 frames, b&w, comes to about $4.80, shipped. My guess is this is where pharmacies send their black and white stuff and charge a nice mark-up, and also where they send color when you don't want it in an hour.

You mail to them with free mailers they send you or you print our from their site. I have an account with them but haven't used them yet. Their prices are the least expensive I've seen. Not sure how good they are though.

If interested: http://www.yorkphoto.com/home/t_=87421405

[40oz]

Originally Posted by JeremyR

I am now considering self-development as well, as development in a lab can easily add up to around $7 per roll (given surcharges for push processing, etc.). It's also more than a little bit out of my way.

It sounds like some of the chemistry can have a long shelf life indeed. Based on what I've read here, it sounds like it would be more economical to self-develop, even for a relatively low volume of perhaps 1-2 rolls/month. Does the math actually work out? For relatively infrequent developing, is there anything I should be aware of concerning longevity of chemicals?

Cheers,
Jeremy

The HC-110 syrup apparently lasts as long as you'd ever care to let it sit. I have no idea how long fixer lasts, but it won't go bad in a few months under a sink. Other than some sort of photoflo type rinse, which probably lasts as long as water, there really aren't any other chemicals involved in just developing negatives. Even if you use "the expensive stuff," it's pretty cheap. If you use HC-110, $50 in chemicals would last you several years at a rate of a few rolls a month.

I've never bothered with a per-roll breakdown, but it isn't much. You can re-use fixer quite a few times, a small bottle of HC-110 for $12-15 will do at least 40 rolls of film, and a small ~$4 bottle of wetting agent will probably outlast eveything else. You're looking at maybe $10 for enough fixer for 10 rolls if you never re-use it, 40 or more if you do. So we have perhaps $30 for processing 40 rolls of film, conservatively. It can be done cheaper, and you can spend more if you want. But less than $1 a roll is a safe estimate.