File: 1566022637329.jpg (67.7 KB)

67.7 KB JPG

>>4411869
>tfw make my on rodinal with painkillers and drain cleaner
>use pool cleaner as a fixer
>shoot fomapan
Life is comfy bros

>>4411869
Just paid $7.67 for a c41 dev only at my local lab. Sorry you live in the boonies and have to mail it I guess

>>4411870
>this anon is ready to die for his hobby
Based

>>4411869
the lab near me does C-41 35mm for $7 and C-41 120 for $3.75. Black and white and E-6 are more expensive though. I can shoot 645 and scan it myself with okish results, certainty not like super high mp or whatever, but good enough for IG and computer screens

I just mailed off some e6 for $13/roll which is the same as it was 3 years ago. Is OP australian or something?
>>4411909
dang that's cheap, I'd shoot lots of 120 gold
I gave up onmy local lab after they lost or fucked up several rolls

>>4411926
yeah idk how she makes money. I assume is on scanning and prints

>>4411869
My local places charged the equiv of five bucks USD for a 36 roll developed but not scanned. $12 all up if you want it scanned too. Same prices for multiple establishments.

>>4411870
Years ago I made my own colour dev chemicals including a diafine style colour dev. Until I wound up using Kodak e6 lab chems and c41 flexicolor and replenishing them at home, was real cheap to replenish

>>4411869
I shoot b&w and pretend I do it because of elevated taste

>>4411869
film isnt for poor hipsters anymore

>>4411935
those stickers cost a lot of money.

>>4411869
This is awful

File: file.png (60.6 KB)

60.6 KB PNG

high quality scans are 4 euros on top. If you shoot that much film where these prices become an issue get your own lab and enlarge your photos yourself.

>>4411869
Used to do my own c41 and e6 for super cheap

>>4419641
is anything like that? yes.

>>4411876
Memphis film lab does $5 developing only and that's mail-in

>>4412066
that's pretty good, my local ones are $14 for the place that has a week turnaround time and $18+ for the others, it's too much. I'd pay $14 if I could get it back the next day

File: 0C9766FB-DD4F-42D3-A64D-69C1EE555EDF.jpg (58.8 KB)

58.8 KB JPG

>spend a few hundred dollars on a scanning rig because getting my film scanned at the dev lab doubles the total price
>they double dev prices
And this is why I no longer shoot film.

>>4424730
>not switching to black and white and self dev
coward

>>4411869
It’s worse now

>>4411869
Why is black and white more expensive to develop, when anybody can do it at home?

>>4424730
I sold $1000 of film camera and lenses over this shit. The labs aren't even consistently high quality anymore. Most of them are pushing enough volume for mistakes to slip through.

Self dev isn't a real alternative. I don't like B&W, and doing it in color is a huge fucking PITA for anything less than carefully planned sheet film shoots.

>>4431359
>literally the same process as black and white except temp controlled.

WOW what a gigantic insurmountable and impossibly difficult thing to have to do, truly.

In the whole film history today's price is not that high. it's rather average price.
Last decade had extraordinarily cheap price of films.
Of cause all of this is because Cuckdak has been diminished their camera film production since start of 2019 or 2020 if im correct. Don't ask about fujifilm. they are cosmetic chemical company not film company.

>>4431559
>they are cosmetic chemical company
*Pharmaceutical

>>4431353
For big labs usually it’s cause the automated machines are set up for colour, so they end up doing b/w in a less automated way or just manually.

File: father_and_son.jpg (82.7 KB)

82.7 KB JPG

>>4411869
tri-x + diy

>>4411869
I pay like $6 USD equiv here in NZ for dev only at my local place

That's cooked lmao. Our film costs offset it though I guess?

>>4411869
We are living in times of hyperinflation man. Money is worth way less. Sucks.

>picked up 5 rolls of wolfencolor nc500 for 25 bucks
Damn alright alright

>>4411869
just do it yourself

>>4411869
Yeah. Developed a 120 B&W and 135 color the other week. Just short or $30 for develop & "small" scans.

Motivation for me to learn how to develop Or at least B&W since I understand it's easier to do. Plus I can make use of the bulk loader I bought a while back.

Should I get a scanner? Is it a quality = price thing or can I get by with mid-low range gear?

scanner is good

>>4411869
>he shoots in colour
>he doesn't shoot exclusively in B&W

lol.

>he doesn't have his own darkroom in his house
>with his own fix/stop/developer baths, enlarger, drying racks, sink, and trimming station

lmao even. if you shoot film in 2025 and send it off to someone to process you get what you deserve.

>>4411869
Jesus Christ

Cinestill has a $30 kit to develop 24 color rolls. That's barely more than $1 each.

the money isnt the issue for me its being duped into using millenial run "local enthusiast" labs rather than megacorp photo processing as the former have had a single roll of kodak gold for two fucking weeks and the Arasaka of photo developing turned it around in a week, including actually sending the roll off. Fuck small businesses.

>>4411869
develop your film at home. it's so fucking easy it's embarrassing that more people dont do it
i guess it's the consoomercattle mindset

>>4424756
c41 is like black and white you only have to watch temps more carefully
there's no reason to use labs. labs are scams targeting the mentally challenged and vulnerable (film hipsters)

>>4411869
welcome to film in 2025

>>4468260
I don't do it because it doesn't make sense to me, I barely shoot a roll of c41 a color and the chemicals will just go bad and waste unlike my bottle of rodinal that I had since 2015.

>>4468260
B&W is piss easy, just takes time.
C-41 is easy, but takes more time and requires a dedicated space.
I'm not processing E-6 at home fuck that.

>>4468303
are there even films that require e6 nowadays?

>>4468311
Yes? E100 is still being produced.

>>4411869
Sad thread

Good, hipsters and boomers need to suffer more

>>4411869
>shoot film because it's better than digital
>use lab because processing at home is scary
>get scans because meds ran out and the money is tight so buy film instead of mental illness pills
film photogs are the most retarded larpers out there. shoot film just to get digital files anyway. lol

>>4431359
>and doing it in color is a huge fucking PITA
halp my art isn't a one click consoomer cattle affair.

>>4411869
skill issue
chemistry prices didn't change much
I develop, print and/or scan my film myself saved a shitton of money in the long run
at least if you shoot quite often

>>4411869
why would you shoot film when digital is free photos?

File: ci102l-w1200.jpg (121.1 KB)

121.1 KB JPG

>>4479824
>Shoot myself naked in the mirror every day
>Have dedicated camera for this, so only naked shots of me on film
>Ilford FP4, develop myself using permanganate/sulfuric acid reversal process
>Cut and tape the film strips in a drawing book with bright white sheets
>Copy "Sun and Steel" character by character with a black ink brush next to the strips of me.

Call me when I can do this using digital, I want to live a little while I'm here

My local lab does $10 dev and scan if you are willing to wait a week. Sucks to be you I guess.

File: satania-laugh.gif (39.2 KB)

39.2 KB GIF

>tfw paid 3 dollars for color film development
>they had it ready in 40 minutes
you know, living in a third world shithole has his perks

>>4411869
Works fine for me

File: mein neger.jpg (16.5 KB)

16.5 KB JPG

>>4481468
Argentina?

I've been mixing 500ml batches of chemicals for a while now (measuring half the powder from 1l kits) but I recently found out I can do a roll of 120 or two rolls of 35mm with under 300ml in my rotary processor, so I can get 3 batches from 1l kit or 6 batches from a 2l kit. Measuring and mixing the chemicals is a pain though. I read on some boomer forums that if you freeze the mixed up chemicals they don't spoil. That would be much easier to just mix it up all at once and pull it out of the freezer when I need a new batch.

If I can get 6 batches out of a 2l kit ($53) and maybe 4-5 rolls per batch, I should be able to do $2/roll home processing.

>>4487002
Depends of chemicals but freezing solutions may cause most of water crystallize almost pure and chemicals concentrate to degree of coming out of solution. And getting everything back to solution after thawing may or may not be more difficult than dissolving the original powder from kit was.

>>4473605
Digital fags are cuckold.
You let a computer take pictures for you? Do you also let it fuck your wife?

Honestly diy fixer is super easy. Legit bulk thyosulfate is super cheap.

File: 1462196898219.png (263.9 KB)

263.9 KB PNG

>>4411869
>tfw you fell for the film meme

File: Screenshot 2025-12-12 at 06-16-19 kodak gold B&H Photo Video.png (197.7 KB)

197.7 KB PNG

based kodak saving us from filmflation
fuck alaris

>>4487718
Film isn't a meme. Filmfags are meme.
Film is an interesting and unique approach to photography that you can't get with digital, and treating it as such can be a nice experience.
Being a delusional faggot about "muh film is three billion megapickles" and failing to see the massive convenience of digital is the meme.

>>4487875
This. Film is good. Liking film is good. Other people liking film sucks, those fucking hipster douches. It’s only good when I do it, everybody else is stupid. …*those* hipster douches.

>>4487875
>>4487899
Nah. Film is a meme. Simple as.

>>4487899
This but unironically

>>4411869
its really not that hard to develop it yourself

Why the fuck is it more expensive to develop black and white film as opposed to color film? That's fucking insane.

>>4489845
C41 is a standardized process that is uniform regardless of film speed (pushing/pulling aside), while b&w can be done different ways to achieve different outcomes and also requires different timing for different film speeds (unless your lab is doing rodinal stand dev I guess). More complexity = more expensive, while every lab has a machine that basically does c41 for them.

>>4489845
B&W dev is done by hand, and C41 film is done by machine automation.
I've seen a moderate rise of C41 B&W film being sold locally this past year or so. Local shop has sold a lot more XP2 Super than even HP5 according to the owner. The film is like an extra two bucks per roll but costs 2/3rd the dev cost at the same store so it's actually more economical.

Besides, think of how much time it takes you to dev a single roll at home. Even if you've done it a hundred times and have all the chems ready to go, it still takes you a good 20-30 minutes to go through everything all the way to drying. I'm not surprised shops are charging $20 USD a roll to have an intern spend a solid half an hour on a single job.

>>4489852
also that's the reason you never give your BW film to a lab because they don't know what look you want and they just use $something. if you shoot BW film you have to develop yourself to keep full control of the process. otherwise you could just get a digicam and shoot the monochrome JPG profile. same amount of control - just less cost.

>>4415069
I miss the days of $3 film and $5 developing