SergeyT wrote:
A meaningful image could be priceless
6x7 with 10 images per roll is not the only option for film-based photography
Not very image should be taken on film. There is "pre-paid per image" digital that offers more flexibility and convenience when the circumstances are right for it
This was just a roll of film I took only to see if the camera was still usable or not. It was supposed to be a fun project for my kid who wanted to keep/use that camera. Thanks to the high cost of developing, my kid is completely turned off by the idea of film photography. I still hold a (very, very thin) sliver of hope to maybe shoot black and white with my other, smaller medium format cameras someday.
I assume that neither you nor your child is in a rush to burn through all the film that you have
Give it another try and then after some time another try until you finished all the rolls that you have and then send them there https://www.underdogfilmlab.com/services-pricing/ to optimize the associated shipping cost. Check on their shipping rates too.
Try to scan at home, which may become another fun part of working with film. Who knows how it is going to turn out.
Not everything that we do should be seen as an "investment" with implied monetary return
SergeyT wrote:
I assume that neither you nor your child is in a rush to burn through all the film that you have
Give it another try and then after some time another try until you finished all the rolls that you have and then send them there https://www.underdogfilmlab.com/services-pricing/ to optimize the associated shipping cost. Check on their shipping rates too.
Try to scan at home, which may become another fun part of working with film. Who knows how it is going to turn out.
Not everything that we do should be seen as an "investment" with implied monetary return
panos.v wrote:
As others said find a lab that is cheaper and wait till you have enough film to pay for the postage.
Exactly. When I used to mail my film in, I would wait until I had a bunch of rolls as shipping cost was the same for one roll or multiples.
My local lab charges $8 to develop. I scan myself using my Z7, and I assume the OP has a digital camera so perhaps should try to scan his own film?
Also OP if you want to try to develop your own B&W , Cinestill DF96 Monobath is a very good way to ease into it. Just one bottle for everything and it is reusable up to about 16 times. It will make the cost of your b&w dev drop down to just over $1/roll.
Desmolicious wrote:
Exactly. When I used to mail my film in, I would wait until I had a bunch of rolls as shipping cost was the same for one roll or multiples.
My local lab charges $8 to develop. I scan myself using my Z7, and I assume the OP has a digital camera so perhaps should try to scan his own film?
Also OP if you want to try to develop your own B&W , Cinestill DF96 Monobath is a very good way to ease into it. Just one bottle for everything and it is reusable up to about 16 times. It will make the cost of your b&w dev drop down to just over $1/roll....Show more →
Thank you!! Will Cinestill DF96 work with Tri-X, or only on certain types of B&W film?
Something that doesn’t get factored in is the high cost of buying a digital body capable of competing with 6X7. My X2D is used on a copy stand with a very expensive Hasselblad lens/adapter and extension tube. When I shoot Portra 160, Ektar 100, or many of the B&W film stocks I’m not getting the full resolution with just 100MPix. So, think how many rolls of film you can buy and develop for the price of a medium format digital system - medium format film system. $$$$
Df96 monobath is the simplest processing regimen in existence.
If you're like me, and want to dive into the literature before doing stuff yourself, D-76 and HC-110 probably have the most information out there, freely available on the internet. They do require the traditional processing procedures though.
Good news is all the mainstream developers and the modern films are very forgiving. You can be sloppy with the timings, cut some corners, and still have lovely negatives.
snegron7 wrote:
I recently brought out my RB67 from storage thanks to my kid's new-found interest in film photography. We purchased a few 120mm rolls of the new Kodak Gold 200 and took a few test shots.
Because of the larger frame size on the RB67, I was only able to get 10 frames per roll. I knew this beforehand, so no complaints there. My shock came after developing one roll of film.
The price I paid for developing + scanning was around $28.00 (not including the prints). When I picked up the developed roll, I was charged an extra $6.00 for the 10 small (4"×5") prints. The rolls of film were about $8.00 each, so the grand total I paid for these 10 pictures was $42.00.
Yes, that's $42.00 for 10 pictures. One single roll of 120mm color film developed and printed costs $42.00. That equals roughly $4.20 per image. I still have 8 rolls of color film in my fridge, but I am reluctant to shoot them. It will cost me $336 to shoot these rolls of film.
I know I can save a bunch of money if I developed my own film. I also know that instead of shooting with my RB67, I can shoot with one of my smaller Mamiya 645's which will give me 20 images per 120mm roll instead of 10.
At this rate I can't afford to shoot with 120mm film anymore. In the "old film days", I remember 120mm film costing less to develop than 35mm film. Obviously that's not the case anymore. So, where can I get the remaining 8 rolls of color 120mm developed that will cost me less than $28.00 per roll?
Because of the insanely expensive cost of color film developing, these will be the last 8 rolls of 120mm color film I'll be shooting. I might try B&W in the future with the intent of developing and scanning it myself, but color film is prohibitive for me at this time....Show more →
Honestly its why I stopped shooting it-
I don't enjoy developing/scanning of film so everything I did after the shoot was in a lab- The cost was just so prohibitive I stopped doing it.
The ways listed to save money is just if you want to do it- I hated that part of the process so I moved on. The biggest thing for me was the scanning-
I would get a color negative and then have to play with the colors to get the look I desired out of the film. This seemed backwards to the reason I shot film in the first place. I wanted the colors to be how the colors where from the film
So I think if you shoot film you have to answer this question- Do I want to scan it myself? Do I want to develop it myself?
If both those are no, just stop now If its one of the 2, you make the call but there is no free lunch so to say on the film side!
dourbalistar wrote:
To be precise, I'm using LegacyPro L110, which is a clone of HC-110.
Adox came out with "Syrup 110". I used the original Kodak version when I started developing my own film after many years. The Rodinal was about gone and I deciced to make a change. I was ready to buy some Legacy Pro, then I say the Adox.
madNbad wrote:
Adox came out with "Syrup 110". I used the original Kodak version when I started developing my own film after many years. The Rodinal was about gone and I deciced to make a change. I was ready to buy some Legacy Pro, then I say the Adox.
@madNbad, I saw this too! When my current bottle of LegacyPro L110 runs out, I might get a bottle of the Adox Syrup 110, along with a bottle of Rodinal.
Film photography has always been expensive. I remember when it took me an hour's labor to purchase and soup a roll of film. (Printing was exorbitant if you wanted it done well.)
Eventually built a darkroom, to save money and get better prints.
Later, on a four-month photo trip to Alaska, my biggest expense after gasoline? Not food or lodging: Kodachrome slide film and processing (couldn't do that chemistry at home). Slept in the pickup and cooked on the tailgate to save money for film/processing.
Perhaps the age of digital has made us think the incremental cost of an image should be low to free, but this came along only with digital.
madNbad wrote:
Adox came out with "Syrup 110". I used the original Kodak version when I started developing my own film after many years. The Rodinal was about gone and I deciced to make a change. I was ready to buy some Legacy Pro, then I say the Adox.
Careful not to put that on your pancakes if you wake up hungover.
