Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-12-2011, 05:11 PM   #46
Veteran Member
PGillin's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: South Florida, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 336
I've been a photographer for a little over a year. I shoot film exclusively. Originally I picked up a film Pentax because 45$ for a Spotmatic and 55mm is DIRT CHEAP. However, I've become enamored with manual cameras, build quality, and being able to switch emulsions. I'll probably never go digital because-
1. No digital gives me the feel of my Spotmatic or KX. Milimetres of chrome plating, leatherette, and black enamel give a very nice aesthetic and feel good in my hands. They layout suits me, there are no convoluted menus or un-marked dials. There is a shutter speed and film speed dial. Aperture is on the lens. The simplicity is refreshing
2. Film is nice because you can pick a film to suit the situation. You aren't stuck with one sensor for all your shooting. Film also has a low-speed advantage. Show me a dSLR with full-frame and ISO 25-64. Most don't go below 200.
3. I enjoy developing. Printing and scanning, not so much, but I'd rather develop than move pictures to a computer and convert from RAW.

Basically, a manual 35mm SLR suits my photography and style of work very well. Others may be better served by digital, but I've yet to find ANY camera, film or digital, that handles as well as my spotmatic, and I've been able to use a few of the schools, a few friends, and handle almost every brand under the sun in-store.
It's a preference, and to me, it has as much to do with the camera as film vs. digital. If the Spottie was digital, I'd be a digital guy. But for me, Film and Spotmatic are perfect, or at least as close to it as photo equipment can be.

02-13-2011, 05:04 PM   #47
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,158
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Hrm, I wonder how much negs-only development costs these days
About $3 for C-41 on a 36 exposure roll of 35mm film and $4 for 120. At least, that is what I have been paying.


Steve
02-13-2011, 05:09 PM   #48
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
for c41 35mm i've been paying $3 with a basic scan
120 there are no cheap labs locally, but the pro abs do an awesome job albeit at a high price
02-14-2011, 07:25 AM   #49
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,464
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
About $3 for C-41 on a 36 exposure roll of 35mm film and $4 for 120. At least, that is what I have been paying.


Steve
Ah, I'm assuming Seamuis is talking conventional B&W. Mostly, that's all I shoot for film these days: digital's brought color back into the equation, really.

02-14-2011, 07:47 AM   #50
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
a quick look at local pro labs that still do b/w
lab 1 - $7/roll +$2 for cut and sleeved $6 for a 4 bit scan, $20 for 16 bit at time of processing at one popular lab
Lab 2 (b/w only lab) - develop only 9.25, cut and sleeve 10.25 no cheap scan options but he does proper contact sheets and gang proofs just like the old days
develop and contact sheet - $20
enlarged gang proofs (11x14,16x20 and 20x24) basically a contact sheet but blown up on an enlarger to a larger sheet $18-40-55

Pro Proofs at time of processing whole roll (more than one of each is cheaper)
4x6 - $0.99 ea
5x7 - $1.75ea
8x10 -$6ea

though he is pricey option 2 is the only guy i would trust my negs to now I've had 2 other labs screw things up, he never has. For b/w printing i go to him as i don't have an enlarger right now (and for a fine art enlargement even if i had an enlarger i'd be tempted to use him his work is stellar)
02-14-2011, 10:13 AM   #51
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,464
Heh, Eddie, that's getting pretty pricey, indeed.

If it's that bad in the US, it definitely sounds like I could pretty soundly beat that per-roll cost in the right sort of quantities: someone gets five or ten rolls behind, or a few hundred, I could probably work out a mutually-beneficial scheme where I could clear it up with a couple of big tanks.

I run at a different speed than pro labs, but there could be a niche there for hobbyist backlogs. (Maybe charge by the tank, or something. Big tank vs small tank isn't that big a difference, timewise, and it's not the same kind of overhead as a machine would take.) So, maybe I can hit a niche, there.

My 'RML Enterprises' scheme will be involving a little of this, a little of that, maybe see if anything becomes really profitable that I can actually keep up with, but at least, but the general idea is to be able to do a lot of odd things, since amid the various health issues, I often can't do any one thing all the time, but I can usually do *something.*
02-14-2011, 10:51 AM   #52
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
would people pay 40 dollars for 16 bit full resolution tiffs from a dedicated film scanner, cropped, post processed, etc, per roll?
02-14-2011, 10:53 AM   #53
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
it's running $20 a roll up here for 16 bit scans Tiff output

02-14-2011, 11:00 AM   #54
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
it's running $20 a roll up here for 16 bit scans Tiff output
do they say which scanner exactly?


my nikon coolscan 5000 needs about a minute and a half per photo just to scan, factor in setup time, changing strips, and post processing, that's about 2 hours of work for a 36 roll.

so either they are using inferior technology or are literally doing it for pennies.

i've always been curious.
02-14-2011, 11:15 AM   #55
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
depends on the shop
I've seen flatbed to imacon used (though imacon scans are more like the $40)
no pp beyond the basic is ever provided, that's up to you when you get it home (dust and scratches shouldn't be an issue as they are doing it at the time of processing)

also for 35 most of the better mini labs are capable of wet scanning the image at 4 bits but the better ones can also scan at 16 bit so it's automated

for pro labs with scanning look at imagworks on spadina, colourgenics on don roadway
and pikto in the distillery (there are numerous others but these 3 though not sheap do good work

colourgenics is the priciest (and best IMHO, they specialize in Fine art work)

Colourgenics Price List - boutique quality you can afford.

most of them will be using something like the noritsu for the type of job this is and colourgenics is $30 tiff 16 bit, Pikto is $22

although it is a good scanner the 5000 isn't fast enough for commercial lab work (neither is the 9000)

the Imacons aren't that fast but due to the huge image size you pay a premium for them
02-14-2011, 11:26 AM   #56
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
i didn't know the noritsu scanned at time of developing, that is intersting.

there was actually a noritsu in the corner of a shoppers' next to my work that was supposed to be "shipped back to head office", i asked the manager how much he would sell it for considering it would probably see the landfill, he never did get back to me..



reason i'm wondering is i'm debating whether to waste time advertising scanning services on kijiji or whatever. Charging 40 bucks for a roll and full resolution tiff's, custom tailored for each type of emulsion (using a program like vuescan or silverfast), is the only viable way given how much time i would sink into it.

it may not be the fastest way, but the results would be pretty high quality
02-14-2011, 11:36 AM   #57
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,464
As scanning goes, I just can't believe how primitive the state of tech seems to be. I suppose if one had the setup anyway, it could pay off. Dunno about 40 bucks a roll, though, sight unseen.
02-14-2011, 11:38 AM   #58
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
the problem being i think the people who would really care (ie the people on the forum for instance) would probably do it themselves. i shoot enough film that if i paid $0 a roll i could fund a nikon 9000 in no time. (i shoot medium format so the 5000 is useless to me)
i do basic flatbed scans instead and if the image deserves a high res high quality file i'll go rent time on an imacon ($35/hr is the going rate, but you can better in off peak hours)
in an hour i can scan a pretty good number of files, and it's not like i'm going to do the post there, i'll do that at home
just grab a large file and go
02-14-2011, 12:39 PM   #59
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
the problem being i think the people who would really care (ie the people on the forum for instance) would probably do it themselves. i shoot enough film that if i paid $0 a roll i could fund a nikon 9000 in no time. (i shoot medium format so the 5000 is useless to me)
i do basic flatbed scans instead and if the image deserves a high res high quality file i'll go rent time on an imacon ($35/hr is the going rate, but you can better in off peak hours)
in an hour i can scan a pretty good number of files, and it's not like i'm going to do the post there, i'll do that at home
just grab a large file and go
except that both the 5000 and the 9000 are discontinued, you would be looking for used units.

the thing is, it is all about marketing

personally i am surprised how many people are unaware the benefits of high-end scanning.

also, what is the cost of your time?

you can rent an imacon for 35 bucks an hour, but you also have to put in that 1 hour of work and legwork, what is that worth to you?

seems to me, 40 bucks and having someone do everything for you is not that bad
02-14-2011, 12:48 PM   #60
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,161
maybe for you, but i don't have the cash to burn. if i could charge out expenses on film to someone i would just build high end scans into the cost
i shoot film for myself though so no-one but me to charge
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is REAL photography? [final] RioRico Photographic Technique 54 06-21-2012 08:24 AM
Has anyone done real estate photography before? jennverr Photographic Technique 19 02-02-2011 07:17 AM
Returning to photography LostAgain Welcomes and Introductions 1 12-29-2010 07:25 PM
Returning to Photography and Pentax after 30years. Touchwood Welcomes and Introductions 3 10-08-2010 04:38 AM
Real Estate Photography spun Photographic Industry and Professionals 16 08-12-2009 09:43 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top