Cheaper to develop your own?

[Thomas V]

Face it...unless we're paid photographers, our gig is a hobby. Being that the true value is determined by the person with the camera.

 

[cgw]

Face it...unless we're paid photographers, our gig is a hobby. Being that the true value is determined by the person with the camera.

Fine but it's magical thinking to argue that costs are somehow inconsequential. Besides, that "true value" is meaningless. Film, paper and chemistry cost money. Think you're confusing personal value with something monetary.

 

[nerwin]

I've always wanted to learn how to develop my own film. Just the thought of shooting roll and developing it myself for the complete experience. I really like b&w film and that's easier to develop, but film isn't cheap and I don't want to ruin the pictures either so it's a tough call.

However, I found a lab that I like..for as little of film I shoot, they are great because it's affordable. I sent in 3 rolls of 35, had them do enhanced scans and they rather high resolution and have the negatives returned for $40 even. I mailed them out on a Saturday and I had scans the following Thursday and my negatives Tuesday. I think it's very reasonable.

What I like is that I have to wait. It's weird, I know. But I am sooo used to shooting digital and immediately load them into Lightroom. I can't do that with film lol so it allows me time to come down the "high" of shooting and thus I appreciate those photos even more after it stewed a little.

But yeah I still wanna try to develop just for the experience and seeing the photos you take come to.life.

 

[Thomas V]

I've always wanted to learn how to develop my own film. Just the thought of shooting roll and developing it myself for the complete experience. I really like b&w film and that's easier to develop, but film isn't cheap and I don't want to ruin the pictures either so it's a tough call.

However, I found a lab that I like..for as little of film I shoot, they are great because it's affordable. I sent in 3 rolls of 35, had them do enhanced scans and they rather high resolution and have the negatives returned for $40 even. I mailed them out on a Saturday and I had scans the following Thursday and my negatives Tuesday. I think it's very reasonable.

What I like is that I have to wait. It's weird, I know. But I am sooo used to shooting digital and immediately load them into Lightroom. I can't do that with film lol so it allows me time to come down the "high" of shooting and thus I appreciate those photos even more after it stewed a little.

But yeah I still wanna try to develop just for the experience and seeing the photos you take come to.life.

It takes a little time to learn the process but after that it becomes second nature. B&W is so good for a starter. The processing temperatures are forgiving whereas color needs to be maintained exactly. I began doing it as a young guy of 14 but lost sight of it at 16 due to car driving and girl. Now at the mature age (some in the family would differ on that) I've picked up the hobby again.

 

[Thomas V]

Fine but it's magical thinking to argue that costs are somehow inconsequential. Besides, that "true value" is meaningless. Film, paper and chemistry cost money. Think you're confusing personal value with something monetary.

There's a cost to digital and can be rather high too. Some of the better cameras out now can cost $1,000+. If you amortize that in per-shots you most crank like crazy. A casual shooter like me could never justify a good digital using numbers.....it really equates to enjoyment.

 

[cgw]

There's a cost to digital and can be rather high too. Some of the better cameras out now can cost $1,000+. If you amortize that in per-shots you most crank like crazy. A casual shooter like me could never justify a good digital using numbers.....it really equates to enjoyment.

Been awhile since I've seen that well-chewed old bone excavated...

 

[Don Fischer]

I liked film and even developed a little, it was a hoot! But much happier with digital. Can see the photo right after shooting it, can't do that with film. Then I can also use the same card over and over, can't used the same film over and over. What's more to get to a film processor where I live is about 60+ miles anymore. If I was going to get back into film, it would be medium format and I have a bunch of developing and printing equip. Of course I also have this computer and a 13" printer also. Not all that great, shoot lot of the time I have no idea what people are talking about here! But I do what I like and if someone else likes it also, so much the better! I'm really not interested in the science behind photography, just doing something I enjoy.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I guess mine would be a hybrid system of sorts.

I do my black and white 4x5's in an old developing tank, 4 to 6 sheets at a time. The tank can hold 12 sheets. I usually let 8 to 12 shots accumulate and do smaller batches, in case something goes wrong. After rinsing, I hang the 4x5 sheets on a line to air dry.

For printing, I go digital, I have a back lit negative holder under a table top mounted tripod and camera. I can review them on the computer. A 4x5 negative does not require any type of macro-lens to get a good black and white digital image.

Experience has shown that even though I like 5x7 prints, I can burn though a lot of time, paper and chemicals chasing the "perfect" darkroom print. My digital approach allows me to study and select the negatives, I feel are worth the darkroom time and effort.

There is satisfaction in holding a darkroom print, but in my case, it is never a quick one and done.

 

[smoke665]

There's a cost to digital and can be rather high too. Some of the better cameras out now can cost $1,000+. If you amortize that in per-shots you most crank like crazy. A casual shooter like me could never justify a good digital using numbers.....it really equates to enjoyment.

Been awhile since you priced digital??? Better double/triple that for camera body only, unless you're going well used.

@Grandpa Ron not knocking your methods at all, whatever works. I started in film in the late 60s, getting the shot was fun, but gratification from shooting was always muted because of the delay. The real "magic" for me was in the darkroom when images came to life.

Today I'll likely do the same as others and convert my negatives to digital scans, but doing so (even with a high resolution scan) loses some of film's advantage and leaves me feeling a little cheated in the experience.

 

[Thomas V]

The newest of my digitals, was a Nikon D3500, and that was a gift from my daughter otherwise my digital stuff is secondhand or factory deep clear outs (my Olympus E-1). I even use a Nikon D1, yes, a D1 from time to time. For me it's not the camera but the captur.

 

[Thomas V]

I guess mine would be a hybrid system of sorts.

I do my black and white 4x5's in an old developing tank, 4 to 6 sheets at a time. The tank can hold 12 sheets. I usually let 8 to 12 shots accumulate and do smaller batches, in case something goes wrong. After rinsing, I hang the 4x5 sheets on a line to air dry.

For printing, I go digital, I have a back lit negative holder under a table top mounted tripod and camera. I can review them on the computer. A 4x5 negative does not require any type of macro-lens to get a good black and white digital image.

Experience has shown that even though I like 5x7 prints, I can burn though a lot of time, paper and chemicals chasing the "perfect" darkroom print. My digital approach allows me to study and select the negatives, I feel are worth the darkroom time and effort.

There is satisfaction in holding a darkroom print, but in my case, it is never a quick one and done.

The digital scanning methods I have available here at home are limited in resolution so I rely on my older enlarger.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

As I mentioned, I use digital conversion's, it is fast, cheap, it can enhance a poorly shot negative, but as I also mentioned, it is an easy way to select those negative deserving of more that a 5x7 digital print.

I will let others worry about film verses digital and how to get the best image.

But, if you put time, cost, ease of doing, aside; as "Smoke" pointed out, there is certain touch of darkroom magic, one feels then an image appears.

Unfortunately hobbies rarely justify their cost, and everyone has their cost limiting factor.

 

[John Fontana]

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?

Nothing beats that moment when the developed film is taken out of the tank, slid off the spiral and held up to the light!

 

[Thomas V]

Nothing beats that moment when the developed film is taken out of the tank, slid off the spiral and held up to the light!

Exactly!!

 

[smoke665]

Nothing beats that moment when the developed film is taken out of the tank, slid off the spiral and held up to the light!

Except seeing the image come to life on a print in the tray?