Exposure Film Lab, worth the price?

[RichardC27]

I'm back from honeymoon in Mexico with four rolls of 35mm film to get developed. I've always used FilmDev for my development and scanning so far, but I've had a few minor issues with the scans on a couple of rolls (one image was warped, and one roll came back with a thin green line through the middle of some images). Given these are quite important rolls from a special holiday, I'm thinking of sending them to a more expensive lab. Will I notice a difference in the scan quality between Exposure Film Lab and FilmDev? Has anybody used both for a direct comparison. I don't want to spend double the price per roll to end up with basically the same result.

 

[Mr Badger]

I've been happy enough with AG Photolab for developing and scanning, plus you get the scans on a CD so it's harder to lose them in the event of a computer drive failure (backing them up on a hard drive or two just in case the CD ever goes wrong). I think some others on here have used 'pro' type labs in the past, including one in Canada I think.

However, if I were in your position I'd perhaps think about sending the films in a couple of batches, or even individually, using a 'signed for' or 'special delivery' service so it's hopefully less likely to go missing in the post, and perhaps pay the extra for a similar return service? For an important film, I also put a slip of paper with my address on it in the plastic film container (wrapped round the film cassette and gently but securely held in place with a small elastic band) so if it comes out of the padded envelope there's a chance it might get sent back to me.

Odds wise, sending in separate batches you might theoretically be increasing the chance of any one film going missing in the post or getting damaged by the developing machinery or scanner, but also increasing the chance that at least one or more will survive and arrive home safely! If you send in batches you can always send the first roll to your chosen lab and see if you are happy with the service? That's just my thoughts, so don't blame me if you think it's a good idea and something goes wrong and/or you don't like the lab! Hope this is useful.

 

[ChrisR]

So far I've never (touch wood) had a film go completely missing in the post or lab for any lab...

If you get bad results from Filmdev, they don't post the negatives for a few days, so check the downloads, and if there's an issue call them up and I'm sure they'll fix it. (Doesn't help with the warped negative though; I've never had that one!)

 

[skysh4rk]

Will I notice a difference in the scan quality between Exposure Film Lab and FilmDev?

Looking at a single image, you may or may not see much of a difference from lab to lab. Across a series of photographs, however, better labs should produce more consistent results (e.g., exposure, colour balance, etc.) that more closely match your stated preferences.

Of course, any lab's capability to produce good results largely depends on what you send them...

To my mind, Canadian Film Lab are the best lab going (they have a UK mailing address as were formerly UK Film Lab) and have similar prices to Exposure Film Lab, but I believe that CFL have moved entirely to a closed client list. I've never seen or heard of Exposure Film Lab, so I presume that they're quite new.

 

[droj]

I suspect that scanning across all labs is mostly done as an automated process on similar machines (Fuji / Noritsu). So you wouldn't expect scan quality to vary much.

Scanning is a form of digital capture, and the concerns are the same as with using a digital camera - you normally want to guard against blocked shadows, but above all blown highlights. I tend to think that scanning yourself might be the best bet in that you can control the exposure for each original and compensate as necessary.

I've certainly had negs back with lab scans where there was highlight detail in the negs (dark areas) that the scans had lost completely. Which ain't good enough for me.

Or you could break the bank and pay for a Flextight or a drum scan somewhere ...

 

[skysh4rk]

I suspect that scanning across all labs is mostly done as an automated process on similar machines (Fuji / Noritsu). So you wouldn't expect scan quality to vary much.

There will be a difference and the better labs should be individually editing/adjusting your scans.

To use your digital capture analogy, would we expect the results from everyone using a Sony A7 camera to be the same? No, because the operator is key, not the equipment.

Scanning is a form of digital capture, and the concerns are the same as with using a digital camera - you normally want to guard against blocked shadows, but above all blown highlights. I tend to think that scanning yourself might be the best bet in that you can control the exposure for each original and compensate as necessary.

I've certainly had negs back with lab scans where there was highlight detail in the negs (dark areas) that the scans had lost completely. Which ain't good enough for me.

You have mentioned this before about blown highlights, but this seems pretty unlikely to me for film photography and lab scans. If you are consistently having this issue, it is more likely to be an issue at the time of exposure (e.g., wide subject brightness range) rather than anything to do with the lab. The lab can only work with what you give them and they only will make global adjustments.

 

[droj]

but this seems pretty unlikely to me for film photography and lab scans.

It happened! What's 'likelihood' got to do with it?

likely to be an issue at the time of exposure (e.g., wide subject brightness range) rather than anything to do with the lab.

I exposed slide film successfully for years. And this was neg film! As I said, but it seems that you didn't bother to read it, on the light box with a loupe there was detail in the affected negs that was blown in the scans.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

A lot of people switch between labs based on price or various other factors, where they would,d be much better communicating with their (good) lab and building up a relationship with them. This way, as @skyshark says above, your results will be more consistent. I only use CFL, although when they closed for a while I have used Carmencita who are also very good. Sometimes dev and scan B&W myself and have been printing lately too, but will keep sending my colour work off to CFL. They know how I like my scans and I have to do very little in terms of adjustment when I get them back. IMO, that's worth paying the extra for.

 

[skysh4rk]

It happened! What's 'likelihood' got to do with it?

I exposed slide film successfully for years. And this was neg film! As I said, but it seems that you didn't bother to read it, on the light box with a loupe there was detail in the affected negs that was blown in the scans.

It happened (as in a couple of times, but not usually) or it happens (as in frequently)?

The former seems perfectly plausible, but it would seem unlikely to me if it's the latter (which is how I read your previous post, but perhaps you meant something different).

 

[RichardC27]

I've been happy enough with AG Photolab for developing and scanning, plus you get the scans on a CD so it's harder to lose them in the event of a computer drive failure (backing them up on a hard drive or two just in case the CD ever goes wrong). I think some others on here have used 'pro' type labs in the past, including one in Canada I think.

The fact they come on CD is the one reason I didn't got with AG Photolab when I started back using film. I don't have anything in the house with a CD drive anymore so a download link is hugely preferable for me. I should get a little USB CD drive really.

So far I've never (touch wood) had a film go completely missing in the post or lab for any lab...

If you get bad results from Filmdev, they don't post the negatives for a few days, so check the downloads, and if there's an issue call them up and I'm sure they'll fix it. (Doesn't help with the warped negative though; I've never had that one!)

The negative was fine, it hadn't been scanned properly so the image file I received was warped. I did mention it to them but they'd already posted the negatives back to me. It's just I've sent six films to them and two have had minor issues so their success rate isn't great. Which leads me on to my next point...

There will be a difference and the better labs should be individually editing/adjusting your scans..

I think this is what's attracting me to try a pricier lab. FilmDev clearly don't look at the scans at all before sending them out as the issues I've mentioned were quite obvious. That's fine, at £6 for dev and scan I wouldn't expect them to, but given these photos are from a special trip I'm tempted to try a lab that will individually look at each image. Plus I can get full resolution TIFFs for further editing from Exposure which I also can't do from FilmDev. Thanks for the advice everyone

 

[excalibur2]

The fact they come on CD is the one reason I didn't got with AG Photolab when I started back using film. I don't have anything in the house with a CD drive anymore so a download link is hugely preferable for me. I should get a little USB CD drive really.



The negative was fine, it hadn't been scanned properly so the image file I received was warped. I did mention it to them but they'd already posted the negatives back to me. It's just I've sent six films to them and two have had minor issues so their success rate isn't great. Which leads me on to my next point...



I think this is what's attracting me to try a pricier lab. FilmDev clearly don't look at the scans at all before sending them out as the issues I've mentioned were quite obvious. That's fine, at £6 for dev and scan I wouldn't expect them to, but given these photos are from a special trip I'm tempted to try a lab that will individually look at each image. Plus I can get full resolution TIFFs for further editing from Exposure which I also can't do from FilmDev. Thanks for the advice everyone

I assume you don't have your own scanner OR interested in home scanning?

 

[Deleted member 21335]

I assume you don't have your own scanner OR interested in home scanning?

Takes a lot of work though to get a home scan as good as a lab scan in my experience. Then there’s the dust spotting!

 

[excalibur2]

Takes a lot of work though to get a home scan as good as a lab scan in my experience. Then there’s the dust spotting!

Well yes but all is not lost if the negs are ok for some important shots you had taken...really filmdev are cutting it to the bone as for low scan it's £4 - minus postage of negs back minus packing time and uploading jpgs. So to make a decent profit and if there were two workers, I would think each would have to have his own minilab and if everyone selected low scan, they would have to dev and scan say 12 films per hour, even that output is only allowing 5 mins per film..so 12 films at £3 each would give the worker £36 per hour.

 

[SlimShaney]

I use Exposure Labs - never had a problem.


They store up the negs and post them back in batches, and email me a link to the high-res scans.

 

[excalibur2]

Well my old Tesco film (it was either agfacolor or Ferrania) confused Filmdev's Fuji scanner as nearly every one I had to colour correct.. and thinking my crappy shots of the moon could be entered in this month's comp as......a waste of film