Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Film Development

  • 31-12-2006 05:56PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭


    Hi..I was wondering if there's any place that'll develop my 35mm film for a good price; I don't like paying over ten euro for black and white film (which also takes up to a week to get done). Anybody know any good value places? thanks alot.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Where?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 519 ✭✭✭ThenComesDudley


    gunns on camden st are one of the few places i know that do black and white, but i thinks its about 11 or 12 euro, and takes a few days,

    wait that was what you didnt want to know!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    Fajitas! wrote:
    Where?

    Dublin; thoguh I'd be up for mailing film if it was good value.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭sineadw


    I was told there was only the one place in Dublin doing B&W processing these days?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    sineadw wrote:
    I was told there was only the one place in Dublin doing B&W processing these days?

    Really? Doubt it...I got stuff done in Fuji centre Blackrock, though it took four days.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Gunns, the Camera Exchange and possibly Conns do it instore, other places send their prints to a developing company (I know that down here in Waterford it's all sent to Spectra in Kerry).

    I'm not sure of any other places that do it, but ask around.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭Wez


    I have to ask.. Why would you go through the hassle of using full b+w when you don't have access to a dark room to do it yourself? I don't understand why you don't use b+w cn, it gets developed the same as colour film, but it's not colour.. Maybe you should try it?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    Wez wrote:
    I have to ask.. Why would you go through the hassle of using full b+w when you don't have access to a dark room to do it yourself? I don't understand why you don't use b+w cn, it gets developed the same as colour film, but it's not colour.. Maybe you should try it?


    I don't know what black and white CN is....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    It's b&w film that can go through the same chemicals as colour, making it easier to get developed.

    Still though, there are plenty of reasons to use 'normal' b&w film.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭Wez


    Fajitas! wrote:
    Still though, there are plenty of reasons to use 'normal' b&w film.

    Do you fancy expanding on this? I'm just curious as to why people do it, I've heard of people going through the hassle, but never understood why.. Just part of my yearning to learn!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    First off, iso... C41 B&W comes as 400 generally. It can be pushed or pulled 2 stops...not too bad. But hey, what's wrong with 3200 speed iso! :D It can be pushed up to 6400 iso. If you want grain for effect, or generally want to take photos in extreme low light, you can't go too far wrong.

    Same with going the opposite end... an iso of 25 can be quite appealing to landscape and macro photographers. Other reasons are the results that different films make, for example, some give very high contrast, some low contrast.

    Google Ilfords forums. It's pretty interesting. People really go in for their film types, and know exactly what each film can do.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭Wez


    Yeh, some good points.. Never really thought of using low iso for macro actually, just never occurred to me. I'll have a gander over on the the ilford forums, cheers!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Well, low iso = better clarity and all ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    Fajitas! wrote:
    Well, low iso = better clarity and all ;)


    Oh cool, i just kinda buy what the guy in the shop says.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed

    http://www.photographyreview.com/Learnguidesfilmcrx.aspx

    Two pretty basic links about film, I had a pretty good one bookmarked on my last laptop, but I can't remember it now.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 53,642 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    if you've means of scanning it, gunns charge about €6 for dev only of b&w.


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 7,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭delly


    On a sidenote, I'm going the other way and while I have an S7000 with 12mp(6mp actual) I recently picked up a Canon EOS 500n with a 35-80 Lens on eBay for €50. I'm really enjoying using a true SLR but I was wondering if you do get the roll scanned, what would be the equivalent size in MP and is the quality up to much for editing and developing as digital.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 53,642 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i think hackett's do scanning to about 7mp if you go for scanning with development.
    supposedly a properly focused 50ASA slide shot is the equivalent of about 20MP - though you need to get it professionally scanned to see this quality.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,144 ✭✭✭peter1892


    delly wrote:
    On a sidenote, I'm going the other way and while I have an S7000 with 12mp(6mp actual) I recently picked up a Canon EOS 500n with a 35-80 Lens on eBay for €50. I'm really enjoying using a true SLR but I was wondering if you do get the roll scanned, what would be the equivalent size in MP and is the quality up to much for editing and developing as digital.

    I've gotten scans done in processing where the images are 1840 X 1232 pixels, they're usually around 1MB in size (less for B&W). I don't know exactly how that compares with a digital camera, although my 5MP camera at the highest resolution produces files which are 2592 X 1944 pixels, and around 3MB file size, so it's something less than that.

    The quality is fine for editing in photoshop, especially if working off B&W shots.

    Here's one I made earlier: http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter1892/226493172/in/set-72157594226054350


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,504 ✭✭✭Roen


    You can also get a bogey cast on your prints when you go through the cn process, I've seen sepia or purple or green depending on the shop you get them from.
    Technical Pan @ 6 asa ftw!


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 7,789 Mod ✭✭✭✭delly


    Well its nice to know that if I do get that killer shot and need to edit it that the size will still be good enough for print. Having only ever used digital it does take a bit of getting used to film. Whereas before I'd take shot after shot and think sure I'll pick out the best and delete if necessary, now every shot isn't free.


Advertisement