Topic: No negs after lab dev?

[jojonas~]

I just read this:

I think the new Fuji film labs used by Wal-mart and so many others now use a monobath process. They scan the negatives and destroy the film on its way out of the machine, providing only the scans to the 'customer'.

Since film is destroyed, there is no need for archival fixing or stabilizers/preservatives.

and I gotta say, this scares me! if they start switching out machines all over then home dev would soon be the only option if you want to keep your negatives.

recently I was helping a guy in texas find a good lab, he complained about not getting negatives back from his usual labs. I didn't quite understand why at the time...


have any of you noticed a change in this direction where you're at?

[Late Developer]

I read this in an article on Flipboard the other day and nearly choked on a boiled sweet.  Why would any service provider decide that it's inappropriate to return the very thing (i.e. the film) that you sent to them to be processed??

Yes, it's nice to have print and even a CD if you haven't got a scanner.  However, the film is yours NOT theirs.  The negatives are THE WHOLE POINT.  Are these processing companies stupid, lazy or both?

[Francois]

I'm lucky because the lab I use hasn't gone this route yet...
But I figure they assume that since most people ask for a CD, they feel no need for keeping the negs.
Also, we might have come to a time where CDs cost less than the negative sleeves and the number of hours required to cut and sleeve them...

[Terry]

DIY. 

[Bryan]

I understood the reason they do that is to save on mailing stuff back to the location the customer dropped the film off.  They just send an electronic copy of the scans to the location and they burn it to a CD for the customer.  I would never take my film to a place that didn't return the negatives. 

[charles binns]

Another good reason to process your own.  the last time I sent negatives to be developed (by Jessops) they came back scratched to hell.  They looked like Torvill and Dean had skated the bolero over them.

[Kayos]

I wouldn't use a place that didn't return my negs, alltho these days i do all my processing

There is still a "pro" lab near me, they will do colour wet prints but they know how to charge

[Kai-san]

They're obviously doing this to cut their cost while claiming to save the environment. But I'm quite sure their cost reduction will not result in reduced pricing for their customers! 

[Blaxton]

The only local developing option—CVS Pharmacies—switched to this approach.  As a result, I switched to an online service.  The first roll was the most complicated because I had to get a pre-paid shipping label by registering on-line.  I then shipped the roll of film and they developed it, posted the j-pegs for me to download (very fast turn-around) and then shipped to me the negatives, a CD with the digital files and another pre-paid shipping envelope for my next roll of film.  I thought that it was expensive but I was very impressed with the developing service and the quality of the scans.  It's probably only one of many such services but I can recommend https://thedarkroom.com

Here is a sample from my most recent roll:

[Bryan]

I also use The Darkroom for all my color film, slide and negative, they do a great job.  The scans are great, I think it's worth paying a little more to use them.  The mailers work great, I even sent them from Saipan with no problems. 

[Francois]

What I can see is that in the future only a few labs will process pretty much everything for everyone...

I miss those days when I could get a roll developed for 4.50$ with prints in one hour by a place where I knew the people who printed my stuff...
Still have a bunch of film left from when they liquidated the photo department.

[imagesfrugales]

It appears that they want to stop doing any film service but don't want to provoke the customers too much. Their no-service won't survive for long. Do they still process slide film? Could be the biggest hurdle for color film producers if nobody does a proper and affordable color development anymore. DIY alone can't save the market. Other than b/w.

[John Robison]

This is bull crap. If I wanted digital I'd shoot it in the first place. All I shoot is B&W and of course do my own processing. I stopped color when the local Costco quit C-41. I just cannot justify a 36 exp roll of color costing a dollar a frame what with all the shipping cost. I know if I really wanted to I could buy a kit and that would only be $2~3 a roll depending on how many you could stuff through it.

[Indofunk]

Wow, reading all this, I'm so glad I process my own B&W as well as C41. As I've mentioned before, it costs about $9 a roll here for pro development, and it's local same-day service, but still it would bankrupt me to shoot as much as I do and pay for each roll's development. It's bad enough that film itself costs about $5 a roll. Damn, I need a dayjob again to fund this silly hobby of mine

[Peter84]

This is bull crap.  I just cannot justify a 36 exp roll of color costing a dollar a frame what with all the shipping cost. I

That was one of the main reasons I started doing C41 @home next to B&W. I used the LomoLab before that and starting at €11,- for developing and scanning I soon had to take on another job aswell 

[Terry]

I was ready to give up photography because of increasing lab fees and declining quality of lab work when a friend encouraged me to do my own b+w processing.  Then the only pro lab left in my town started hemming and hawing about whether they were going to continue C-41, so I took Satish's advice and made up a liter of color chemistry.  I actually like my negs better than the ones the lab used to do! 

[Francois]

Pretty much the same here on the b&w and c41 front.

But this no negatives policy has me thinking about something: just imagine how disappointing it would be to send in some slide film and get back just a lousy CD with cheap scans on it!

[Indofunk]

Just got my E6 roll back from CRC. I kinda wish they destroyed the negs. Wait, they did

 

[Francois]

What the f*** did they do to them?
Dev them in tomato soup and kool-aid?

[Indofunk]

tomato soup and kool-aid?

hmmmmmm ..... tomatonol?

[Francois]

Could be... you never know.

[Terry]

I like it--sort of postapocalyptic.

[jharr]

Is it another roll that was stored in a cigarette package outside a bunker at the Proving Grounds Area 1?

[Indofunk]

Is it another roll that was stored in a cigarette package outside a bunker at the Proving Grounds Area 1?

Although I won't deny that the Area 51 theory isn't a very real possibility, I recognize the effects of spent developer, having made the mistake many times myself. Film canisters stored in a jet airplane's engines during multiple oversea journeys tend to come out lighter, not THAT kind of color shifted

[Terry]

I use CRC for my sheet film processing.  This worries me a bit....

[Late Developer]

Just got my E6 roll back from CRC. I kinda wish they destroyed the negs. Wait, they did

 

I'm clearly an old "fuddy-duddy" when it comes to such (most) things but photo processors operate under the same "rules" as other service providers.  Imagine if someone took their best suit / nicest dress to a cleaners and it came back screaming pink and completely buggered? I think the cleaners would be paying for a suitable replacement, at the very least.

However, when it comes to making a total cods of someone's work, their art, their memories, we seem to be happy to blithely write it off as a happy accident that's somehow "interesting" or has some other merit.  I just can't get my head round this.

A local processing lab (which I'd used extensively and, up to that point, had been pretty reliable) processed a roll of Ektar for me a few weeks ago and put the photos on a CD (and returned the negs  ). When I got home and had a quick look at the CD, the colours were very red / garbage and it looked as the negs had been handled by a team of Wookies during the peak of shedding season. I have never seen so much hair on a set of negs.

I took the lot back the following day, at lunchtime when the shop was at its busiest, and laid the evidence on the counter.  The shop uses a big, Fuji "something-or-other" automatic processing machine so I couldn't see how that much hair had got into the process unless the Wookies had taken up residence inside the machine.  After a bit of wriggling, the shop owner reluctantly gave me a roll of Ektar and refunded the cost of pocessing / scanning to CD.  Sadly, I subsequently binned the film and CD as I was seeing red - literally and metaphorically - or I'd have posted one of the shots.

I won't use them again.

[Indofunk]

Well, the reason I blithely accept it is because what are they going to replace? They can't give me back the exact images I captured, so anything they do give me is basically a bribe. Yes, they should definitely refund the price of development, and the replacement roll was nice, but that's not like buying me the exact suit that you ruined.

I thought about going back to complain, but with the time it takes me to get there and back, the refund would be paying me less than minimum wage for my time....

[Late Developer]

Well, the reason I blithely accept it is because what are they going to replace? They can't give me back the exact images I captured, so anything they do give me is basically a bribe. Yes, they should definitely refund the price of development, and the replacement roll was nice, but that's not like buying me the exact suit that you ruined.

I thought about going back to complain, but with the time it takes me to get there and back, the refund would be paying me less than minimum wage for my time....

Satish, it's probably just down to the fact that I'm old and cranky, I've worked in the insurance profession for 36 years and have seen literally thousands of claims from businesses we insure for damage to goods whilst in their posession as they were, for the duration they had it, legally resposible for the item's safe-keeping.  Then there's the cost associated from a professional negligence perspective and being adequately good at what you do.  In the UK, professional photographers can buy insurance to cover the cost of re-shoots, etc.  i'm sure it'll be the same in the USA and elsewhere.

Nevertheless, I still think labs should have some automatic responsibility - even to us amateurs - when they screw up. At the very least, there should be no quibble about getting the roll of film replaced, refunded cost and "something" for the inconvenience - even if it's only the cost of your bus-fare.

[Indofunk]

I totally understand what you're saying, and of course you're completely justified. I'm just too lazy to actually do any of that. I'm the reason businesses can get away with this stuff 

[Kayos]

I totally understand what you're saying, and of course you're completely justified. I'm just too lazy to actually do any of that. I'm the reason businesses can get away with this stuff 

All tho I'm guessing you won't be sending them any more films? Maybe a few more on here won't either so that could affect their business

Maybe

[Indofunk]

I totally understand what you're saying, and of course you're completely justified. I'm just too lazy to actually do any of that. I'm the reason businesses can get away with this stuff 

All tho I'm guessing you won't be sending them any more films? Maybe a few more on here won't either so that could affect their business

Maybe

I won't for sure. Peter will keep going there. All this really means to me is that I won't develop any more E6, and since I think I've processed E6 about 3 times in my life, I'm pretty sure I won't miss it

[Francois]

Do you have their business card?
I know someone who "distributes" cards from bad companies by adding a very descriptive message on the work they do and leaves them in public bathrooms at malls and such... Usually behind the paper holder.

Just imagine finding a card that says "we will ruin your pictures at every chance we have"...
If it doesn't have much an effect on their business, at least it gives the satisfaction of knowing that maybe a few fewer customers will go there.