Digital BW, The Print

Andre writes:

> You've got a special lab that charges you
> by the shot ?

No, but I always fill a roll before getting it developed.

> Average price I've seen for 120 film + c41
> processing is around $7.25 per film.  I dont
> know where you get that $0.21 per shot.

Well, I was calculating with 135 film.  That already blows away digital for
image quality, so no need to compare with 120.  I looked up the film price
at B&H, and calculated the development cost as $3, which is what I normally
pay for one-hour service on 135 C-41.  I can get it developed for only a
dollar, but it takes several days and the quality is often iffy.  Pro labs
want about $9.50 for development, but I don't usually need a pro lab.

> Film used to be cheap.

It depends on what other expenses you have.

I spend hours looking for or taking nice pictures sometimes.  The cost of
film pales in comparison with the cost of my labor.

> Some pros barely shoot a couple of propack
> per week, others, in a day and more. Do the
> math.

Well, at three propacks a week, it would take a year and a half to recover
the cost of the 1Ds--about six months longer than the lifetime of the
camera, at current rates of obsolescence.

Besides, some photographers want the best quality photos, not the cheapest.

> Then please explain the interest in expensive
> digital backs for mf and lf cameras for studio work!

Product and catalog work is well adapted to digital.  That doesn't mean that
all studio work is best done digitally.

> There may be other reasons than cost, could be
> convinience ?

Perhaps, but I'm not quite so sure.  Editing takes a long time in
photography, and digital either has no effect on editing time or makes it
even longer, particularly when photographers go wild shooting thousands of
shots.  Somebody still has to sort through all those shots, or they serve no
purpose.

> One of Toronto largest lab no longer does C-41
> processing, only E6 processing.

Gee, someone else just told me today that E-6 is practically dead.  Who's
right?

> Demand in C41 has decreased as sales in digital camera
> increased. Btw, Toronto is a city of 4 millions.

Well, Paris is a city of 11 million, and all the innumerable photo labs in
town are busy with C-41.

> Really ? Want to hear horror stories about dirt,
> scratches, lost film, lab tech handling processed
> film with bare hand ?

No need.  It doesn't happen to me, so I don't worry about it.  Your labs may
be different.

I find a lab that doesn't scratch or dirty my film, and then I stick with
it.

> I dont think there any need to prove anything.

You're expending a lot of effort to not prove anything, then.

> Film cameras will continue to exist for years to
> come as I see it but it will become more and more
> expensive to shoot with film.

As I've said, there are lots of expenses in photography.

> I dont know of any newspapers that hasn't gone
> digital.

If I ever start up a newspaper, I'll keep that in mind.