Cheaper to develop your own?

[smoke665]

Looking at dipping my toe into medium format film again. Years ago I developed all my B&W, but now I'm not so sure it's cost effective. Chemicals like everything else have gone up to the point that it looks like the cost to develop my own (all things considered) isn't much different than a lab. The only advantage is the time savings and push/pull developing but for a price lab's will do that as well. How about it, is it really an advantage anymore?

 

[webestang64]

FYI.....At our lab we charge $10 develop only any size BW except 220 (rare we get it), Infrared, push/pull, those are another $10 ($20).

If you like Kodak D-76 then get the Arista-76, it's the same stuff and cheaper just adjust for a slight increase of contrast.

 

[480sparky]

By souping your own film, you are in complete control. If the lab screws up, you don't get charged. When DIYing, any mistakes are on you. This also means you can develop with a process far beyond what any lab is willing to do.

My process is to keep all my film and develop them en-masse during the winter. This way all my chemicals are fresh.

Whether is economical for you is impossible for us to say. Far too many variables.

 

[webestang64]

This.....

My process is to keep all my film and develop them en-masse during the winter. This way all my chemicals are fresh.

 

[smoke665]

My process is to keep all my film and develop them en-masse during the winter. This way all my chemicals are fresh.

Years ago I was processing 20 or more rolls a week so chemical turn over was ongoing. Now considering the price of film and cost to develop (DIY or lab) I doubt I have more than a few rolls per month. I'm pretty entrenched in digital that provides plenty of opportunity for experimenting at a lot less cost. For me it's more nostalgic than practical.

 

[480sparky]

If you're in the business of clicking shutters for a living, I can see doing a cost/benefit analysis. But if it's a hobby, I don't see the need to. It's an expense you can file under 'entertainment', just like a nice meal at a fancy restaurant, your golf clubs, collecting stamps...

 

[greybeard]

Back in the early 80's I was heavy into darkroom B&W 35mm, 2 1/4, and 4x5. Unfortunately my enlarger would only accept up to 2 1/4 so I never got the chance to enlarge my own 4x5. Anyhow, the biggest advantage I saw to developing my own negatives was developer choice and of course developer time. If I had the space for a complete old school darkroom I would go all in again but I just don't. Scanning negatives to make b&w digital prints just doesn't appeal to me but, that is just me. As you wrote, you are just dipping your toe into this so, sending it out makes more sense at this point because developing tanks and developer, stop bath, and fixer costs money and take up space. But, if you find that after sometime of working with medium format to be gratifying then, buying film developing equipment and chemicals makes sense.

Send it out for now.

 

[smoke665]

f I had the space for a complete old school darkroom I would go all in again but I just don't. Scanning negatives to make b&w digital prints just doesn't appeal to me

In 70's I had a nice commercial darkroom, built for the task. Like you I've always felt that converting a negative to a digital file was defeating the advantages of film.

I won't have a lot invested in the camera, so I won't feel bad if I grow tired of it.

 

[cgw]

I've shelved an embarrassment of MF gear--645/6x6/6x7--purchased 15 or so years ago when pretty stuff went for chump change. Never any DIY lab lust since friends threw my b&w rolls in with theirs; C-41 and E-6 went to labs. But once I left the Toronto area 4 years ago, I found labs in smaller towns were gone. Stopped shooting film. A couple basement JOBO-equipped labs opened recently in my area. Prices are competitive with Toronto--quality yet to be determined. Still, I love b&w 120 negs DSLR scanned. Film is sometimes thing now but I like the option. No interest in survivalist processing. Lab costs are just an added line item on my bar tab.

 

[smoke665]

Found an in state camera store about 70 miles from me that does developing fairly reasonable. If I'm reading right, B&W is $5/roll developing only, $6/12 exposures to scan. I need to make a road trip!

 

[480sparky]

Make sure you get your negatives back! Some places will soup and scan, then ditch your film.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I have 2 500ML bottles of last generation Rodinal and I'm 65 years old. I'm good.

 

[Thomas V]

Developing film and paper in my home darkroom is the only way for me! Once doing it a couple times the DIY process is rather easy. Far cheaper as well! I don't use a formal darkroom (although I'd love one) I've concocted an assembly/breakdown system for equipment I use.

 

[Thomas V]

Looking at dipping my toe into medium format film again. Years ago I developed all my B&W, but now I'm not so sure it's cost effective. Chemicals like everything else have gone up to the point that it looks like the cost to develop my own (all things considered) isn't much different than a lab. The only advantage is the time savings and push/pull developing but for a price lab's will do that as well. How about it, is it really an advantage anymore?

If some searching is done, I'm sure low costs can be found however the luxury of seeing results almost imedeatly is something I really like.

 

[cgw]

If some searching is done, I'm sure low costs can be found however the luxury of seeing results almost imedeatly is something I really like.

Well, no they can't. Labs face the same price trends as their customers for dev materials. For me, 35mm is history. Medium format is a different story. Film photography is a residual market and costs are proof of it.