Film Developing in the UK

OK, so I'm going to do a bit of a comparison this week.

Usually I've been sending to Photo Express in Hull and while I've been happy with the price and the turnaround (which is impressive), I find the scan quality to be a bit off. For example, on a scan of two nearly identical images the colours are noticeably different - and it's understandable that PE are going for fast and automated scans. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd like to see if I prefer my images if they are scanned with more attention and finesse.

Ideally I'd like the service to be a bit less automated, I know that some of the labs in Australia change the settings of their scanners for different films, and that's basically what I'd be after - a scan that's a bit more accurate.

I'm also trying to work out if a higher res scan would result in a better file to play with on the computer - I won't be printing for a while, but I do need to get a good image after viewing it on the computer.

So, I'm try to work out which of these services would be the best for developing and scanning:
- CC imaging
- AG
- UK Film Lab
- Photo Hippo

Any opinions about which of these 4 would be worth trying out? Leaning towards UKFL as it seems the best.
 
Last edited:
Matt,

I notice you haven't included Peak Imaging in your list, any reason for that?

Andy
 
h'mm bit unfair unless you include prices and anyway why can't you adjust the colours in Photoshop to suit your taste. IMO a test should be between a VG Asda, home scan and lab scan esp looking at shadow details.
 
LonerMatt said:
OK, so I'm going to do a bit of a comparison this week.

Usually I've been sending to Photo Express in Hull and while I've been happy with the price and the turnaround (which is impressive), I find the scan quality to be a bit off. For example, on a scan of two nearly identical images the colours are noticeably different - and it's understandable that PE are going for fast and automated scans. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd like to see if I prefer my images if they are scanned with more attention and finesse.

Ideally I'd like the service to be a bit less automated, I know that some of the labs in Australia change the settings of their scanners for different films, and that's basically what I'd be after - a scan that's a bit more accurate.

I'm also trying to work out if a higher res scan would result in a better file to play with on the computer - I won't be printing for a while, but I do need to get a good image after viewing it on the computer.

So, I'm try to work out which of these services would be the best for developing and scanning:
- CC imaging
- AG
- UK Film Lab
- Photo Hippo

Any opinions about which of these 4 would be worth trying out? Leaning towards UKFL as it seems the best.
Click to expand...

You should definitely try UKFL, as their quality is clearly pretty good. I'd also suggest Peak should be on the list.

I've been pretty pleased with Filmdev (who do C41 only in both 135 and 120); the two Lakes entries I made for POTY15 were done by them. Their turnaround is fast; you get a (highly compressed) WeTransfer download to have a look at as soon as they've scanned (and you've paid?), and the DVD tends to arrive the next day. They will sleeve in 6s and give you a 8-bit TIFF as well as your high quality JPEGs for nothing extra as well. Sadly a 16-bit TIFF isn't available (easily?) from their gear.
 
Andysnap said:
Matt,

I notice you haven't included Peak Imaging in your list, any reason for that?

Andy
Click to expand...

No reason at all other than ignorance - do you think they do great work?

excalibur2 said:
h'mm bit unfair unless you include prices and anyway why can't you adjust the colours in Photoshop to suit your taste. IMO a test should be between a VG Asda, home scan and lab scan esp looking at shadow details.
Click to expand...

The prices all seem relatively comparable (£8-10 for a 35mm roll developed and scanned at the places listed, Photo Express is £4.5).

I can adjust colours, but I find with lo-res scans + a lot of photoshop (or Light Room in my case) = a gross image. And part of me is curious too - how much better is the premium?

I'm less interested in an objective comparison and much more interested in what gets me scans that make me happy - regardless of anything else that's the bottom line.
 
You could also try Photoghost in Aberdeen, I used them for a couple months on a subscription based service. Their quality was always really good and they get your scans to you within a couple days (often the day after I sent them, which is nuts). Any time I had any problems they sorted them very quickly too, even in the evening.

I seem to be the only person that ever mentions them and I can't figure out why haha :LOL:
 
LonerMatt said:
No reason at all other than ignorance - do you think they do great work?
Click to expand...

I never had any problems at all with them. Good quality and a quick turn around.
 
Peak is good quality, quick but a bit expensive. The Filmdev process and scan to medium res is £5 per film.
 
Alright I'll let you guys know what happens!

I don't mind a bit more expense for results, and it's just a matter of seeing what works.

It does seem that UKFL offer a lot of clarity about what they are offering - and I tend to work in projects so their 'pro' service would be really beneficial for this, but there are no shortage of good options. Just have to send off a few rolls and see what works best.
 
Carl Hall said:
You could also try Photoghost in Aberdeen, I used them for a couple months on a subscription based service. Their quality was always really good and they get your scans to you within a couple days (often the day after I sent them, which is nuts). Any time I had any problems they sorted them very quickly too, even in the evening.

I seem to be the only person that ever mentions them and I can't figure out why haha :LOL:
Click to expand...

Well I'm a champion of Asda (before that Tesco) for the last six years, at a cost of £3 dev and scan, as the way I look at it is:- why pay for expensive lab scans if most of the shots are losers and any winners then get a lab scan for those frames (which my son had done once). Of course if £8-£10 is peanuts for dev and scan then best go to a good lab as I've seen at times some wierd effects in very dark shadows with an Asda scan if the scene is very bright and contrasty i.e. highlight\darklight.
 
When scanning on our Frontier, we will make adjustments on a per frame basis to ensure as much detail is extracted from the film as possible. Arguably this could be construed as 'the premium', though it is equally possible that other labs on your list do the same. If you want the best quality scans, scanned with a dedicated film profile, you would need to look at a Flextight scan (or similar). We find many photographers choose a Process & Scan (small) package then cherry pick frames to put through the Flextight.

As LonerMatt said, it's about receiving scans that an individual is happy with. I think its great that there are so many options and labs pushing film services today, considering where film was a few years ago.
 
excalibur2 said:
Well I'm a champion of Asda (before that Tesco) for the last six years, at a cost of £3 dev and scan, as the way I look at it is:- why pay for expensive lab scans if most of the shots are losers and any winners then get a lab scan for those frames (which my son had done once). Of course if £8-£10 is peanuts for dev and scan then best go to a good lab as I've seen at times some wierd effects in very dark shadows with an Asda scan if the scene is very bright and contrasty i.e. highlight\darklight.
Click to expand...

That has been my thinking for most of the time I've taken photos, but I think I might be losing shots or discarding shots that are badly scanned. In any case it's just an experiment so I'd be out £25 or so one time to see if there's a perceptible difference. If not, then well, back to the cheaper for the roll, more expensive for the frame method.
 
excalibur2 said:
Well I'm a champion of Asda (before that Tesco) for the last six years, at a cost of £3 dev and scan, as the way I look at it is:- why pay for expensive lab scans if most of the shots are losers and any winners then get a lab scan for those frames (which my son had done once). Of course if £8-£10 is peanuts for dev and scan then best go to a good lab as I've seen at times some wierd effects in very dark shadows with an Asda scan if the scene is very bright and contrasty i.e. highlight\darklight.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good if your local Asda has a film lab Brian :p

In my town none of the supermarkets (Asda, Tesco, Morrisons, Lidl etc) have photo labs. In fact, the only store in the whole town is Boots which is £5something for develop only.

I don't think £8-10 is peanuts, but when it's a choice between spending £5 on a Boots dev only and a mediocre home scan, or £8-10 on very good quality dev and scan by a lab, it's a no brainer! Even more so if I were to compare the end images side by side
 
ccimaging said:
When scanning on our Frontier, we will make adjustments on a per frame basis to ensure as much detail is extracted from the film as possible. Arguably this could be construed as 'the premium', though it is equally possible that other labs on your list do the same. If you want the best quality scans, scanned with a dedicated film profile, you would need to look at a Flextight scan (or similar). We find many photographers choose a Process & Scan (small) package then cherry pick frames to put through the Flextight.

As LonerMatt said, it's about receiving scans that an individual is happy with. I think its great that there are so many options and labs pushing film services today, considering where film was a few years ago.
Click to expand...

That's more or less 'the premium' that I want to try out!

Am I able to send in a USB and have images scanned to that instead of a CD (unfortunately my computer has no optical drive)? If not it's no big deal, I can just view things at work!
 
I've found a decent snappysnaps that would dev 120 and 35mm for £3 but that means boring home scanning...h'mm which is off topic. Another off topic subject would be:- is there any difference in results between a VG Asda\snappysnaps etc, compentent home and lab dev (dev only)....as chemicals are for c41 process from Kodak, Fuji and 3rd party brews.
 
Ok, so both came back recently.

In short: CC lab was noticeably better.

While both were fine, I felt that UKFL was a premium price but I didn't really notice a difference in the scans. Zooming in I saw more or less the same detail that I saw with Photo Express, just at slightly-more-than double the price, and about 4 times the wait.

CC, on the other hand, provided 3 different resolutions (lo/med/hi), consistent colours, and a noticeably higher quality scan - as in when I zoomed in instead of seeing pixelated ugliness, parts of the images (when they were well exposed) were much clearer, cleaner and more usable.

I haven't edited or printed any images yet (and I'd like to do both), but I suspect I'll either keep going to CC, or just use Photo Express and send individual negatives to CC.

I think where UKFL excel is if a customer has a specific look in mind, or has used a specific technique that they want to be direct about. I imagine that if I'd had a specific request (blue cast, or all this film is one stop over exposed, or something) than UKFL would have been quite expert at dealing with that. As it stands I don't feel that they are doing bad work, per se, just that CC seems to offer more for me. Additionally, they provided feedback, which was good, and I imagine if I was sending film there regularly, over a period of years, this feedback would get more and more informative.

What I'd really like to explore with CC imaging is setting it up so that I can download my scans, then perhaps request 10-15 small prints before they ship the film off.

Still, no matter what, it is a lot of money - paying 10 pounds for developing and scanning isn't a small amount of money - especially when developing processes with C41 seem standard and comparable. But it feels good engaging with people who are enthusiastic and interested in the same stuff I am.
 
Hi @LonerMatt do you have any examples that you could post off CC's scans? I shot a few rolls over the weekend and am going to send them off today, and am torn between UKFL who I've used over the last half a dozen rolls or so, or to try CC based on your feedback. If you have any examples of their scans then it would really help.

Cheers!
 
LonerMatt said:
That's more or less 'the premium' that I want to try out!

Am I able to send in a USB and have images scanned to that instead of a CD (unfortunately my computer has no optical drive)? If not it's no big deal, I can just view things at work!
Click to expand...

Get a USB CD drive - very handy. You can buy them for less than £10 on Ebay.
 
Preparing to send some 120 off to AG for process and scan, and I've found out that prices have increased quite a bit for most services. The good news is that the medium res scans (18 mb) are only a pound more than the low res scans (4 mb). I've adjusted my own spreadsheet, and I'll try to check some of the other supplier prices and then upload it to the nifty watsit before long. In the mean time, check (well, you have to, they have online ordering!). Still probably the cheapest for the service I'm looking for, once you take outwards postage into account...
 
Carl Hall said:
Hi @LonerMatt do you have any examples that you could post off CC's scans? I shot a few rolls over the weekend and am going to send them off today, and am torn between UKFL who I've used over the last half a dozen rolls or so, or to try CC based on your feedback. If you have any examples of their scans then it would really help.

Cheers!
Click to expand...

I can email them, but I don't know that the differences would show up if I uploaded images (with web compression and lack of zooming in). Just message me your email if you're interested.
 
Has anyone use The Darkroom recently? The link in the first post (the-darkroom.com ) suggests that the domain has become unregistered, and trying the darkroom.co.uk gets a company called RK Photographic in Hertfordshire, who have some interesting film and other things for sale, but no processing...

Ah just tried the obvious, and [EDITED] the-darkroom.co.uk does indeed link to the business in Cheltenham that does processing. @TheBigYin I think the link in the resource and the first post of the discussion needs fixing!
 
Last edited:
ChrisR said:
Has anyone use The Darkroom recently? The link in the first post (the-darkroom.com ) suggests that the domain has become unregistered, and trying the darkroom.co.uk gets a company called RK Photographic in Hertfordshire, who have some interesting film and other things for sale, but no processing...

Ah just tried the obvious, and the-darkrrom.co.uk does indeed link to the business in Cheltenham that does processing. @TheBigYin I think the link in the resource and the first post of the discussion needs fixing!
Click to expand...
It's this one http://www.the-darkroom.co.uk/

Too late
 
ChrisR said:
Has anyone use The Darkroom recently? The link in the first post (the-darkroom.com ) suggests that the domain has become unregistered, and trying the darkroom.co.uk gets a company called RK Photographic in Hertfordshire, who have some interesting film and other things for sale, but no processing...

Ah just tried the obvious, and the-darkrrom.co.uk does indeed link to the business in Cheltenham that does processing. @TheBigYin I think the link in the resource and the first post of the discussion needs fixing!
Click to expand...

fixed
 
LonerMatt said:
While both were fine, I felt that UKFL was a premium price but I didn't really notice a difference in the scans. Zooming in I saw more or less the same detail that I saw with Photo Express, just at slightly-more-than double the price, and about 4 times the wait.

CC, on the other hand, provided 3 different resolutions (lo/med/hi), consistent colours, and a noticeably higher quality scan - as in when I zoomed in instead of seeing pixelated ugliness, parts of the images (when they were well exposed) were much clearer, cleaner and more usable.
Click to expand...

Don't all of these labs you've mentioned use the same scanner (i.e., Fuji Frontier)? If so, and I think they do, I'm struggling to see how any one could provide more 'detail' than any other, provided the scan sizes are the same and their machines are working properly.

If there are differences in sharpness, and they're not due to user error, I would think it's just because some labs are applying sharpening at the scanning stage, which may give the appearance of more sharpness (although none is actually there), while others are not. For instance, I know that UKFL do not apply sharpening to their scans, but many labs do.
 
There is every likelihood that other labs use a Fujifilm Frontier scanner, as we do. During the scanning process the operator can select an automatic mode where values are decided upon by the scanner or a manual mode where each frame is evaluated and scanned, making changes to colour and density.

Our standard practice is to never use the automatic mode, meaning each frame of every film is 'graded' to ensure the most detail (tonal detail by maintaining highlights or avoiding crushed blacks). Sharpening is something we avoid completely on 35mm film as it can be too aggressive, even on a low setting. Whilst sharpening or de-sharpening (yes that is actually at setting) works on a sliding scale allowing for a stronger/weaker amount, part of being a professional lab is knowing when and how much sharpening to add (to 120 film if necessary) to the benefit of a frame and not to it's detriment. Sharpening for scanning is therefore as critical as it is for printing. A touch of USM can make all the difference to a print, but the amount applied is tailored for that individual print and at that specific size (and if we want to be technical it also depends on the paper being used, the printing process being used... and so on...).

Using the same hardware for scanning is really no different from an award winning photographer using an everyday camera to take their pictures. It's akin to Top Gear's 'Star in a reasonably priced car'. The same track, the same car, but put an F1 driver in the seat and watch those seconds drop off.
 
Got quite a few rolls back from Photoghost.

1. The subscription price is great, that needs to be said.
2. Developing quality seems good - colours are consistent and everything seems well developed - C41 and BnW
3. The scan quality (for the subscription, it's a basic scan) is really quite bad - grain and noise everywhere, it's the worst quality
4. They do offer cheap(ish) scanning for individual frames which is good
5. The black and white negatives I sent off were cheap to develop and scan, but the negatives look scratched, which doesn't matter too much but does suck a bit
6. Great turn-around with web link to download at no extra cost, with better quality scans (even at a 10-20 pound increase) these guys would be the all round best

It's a good business that's doing good work, and they perhaps have strengths that I don't know about, or perhaps it's just my images, but almost everything (and I sent 10+ rolls) is visibly low res, without even zooming in or cropping.

Totally fine for instagram (which is where my photos are going atm), but a bit disheartening.

Take away: Photo express for speed, CC for quality. CC is still #1 by a very noticeable margin.

As it stands I'll keep sending things to PG - I only have 3.5 months left in the UK and 35 for up to 10 rolls developed and scanned is a great price, I can always get things re-scanned later. But if I were staying longer I'd just go to CC or Photo Express.
 
LonerMatt said:
Got quite a few rolls back from Photoghost.

1. The subscription price is great, that needs to be said.
2. Developing quality seems good - colours are consistent and everything seems well developed - C41 and BnW
3. The scan quality (for the subscription, it's a basic scan) is really quite bad - grain and noise everywhere, it's the worst quality
4. They do offer cheap(ish) scanning for individual frames which is good
5. The black and white negatives I sent off were cheap to develop and scan, but the negatives look scratched, which doesn't matter too much but does suck a bit
6. Great turn-around with web link to download at no extra cost, with better quality scans (even at a 10-20 pound increase) these guys would be the all round best

It's a good business that's doing good work, and they perhaps have strengths that I don't know about, or perhaps it's just my images, but almost everything (and I sent 10+ rolls) is visibly low res, without even zooming in or cropping.

Totally fine for instagram (which is where my photos are going atm), but a bit disheartening.

Take away: Photo express for speed, CC for quality. CC is still #1 by a very noticeable margin.

As it stands I'll keep sending things to PG - I only have 3.5 months left in the UK and 35 for up to 10 rolls developed and scanned is a great price, I can always get things re-scanned later. But if I were staying longer I'd just go to CC or Photo Express.
Click to expand...
That's really interesting , thanks for the update.

It may well be worth sending PG your views on their service, it may be that an improvement in their scanning wouldn't be too much to ask. As for the scratches is that consistent on all films or just one format? Again, it might be worth pointing out your dissatisfaction.
 
RaglanSurf said:
That's really interesting , thanks for the update.

It may well be worth sending PG your views on their service, it may be that an improvement in their scanning wouldn't be too much to ask. As for the scratches is that consistent on all films or just one format? Again, it might be worth pointing out your dissatisfaction.
Click to expand...

I might and see what they say - I know that they were very rushed this week (probably lots of people like sending in film from Easter holidays) and that might contribute to the fast in, fast out, quality.

Also something I thought about: I specified that lots of the photos were over-exposed (I was in Iceland, lots of snow) and those photos seem to have a more successful scan than the photos from England.

RumpFace said:
I take it you don't mind scratches on your negs?
Click to expand...

Honestly no, not really. I'm not pedantic enough to mind when I'm just taking photos for fun.

skysh4rk said:
Could you post a few examples?
Click to expand...

I think I've said it before, but I'll repeat it - it's MUCH easier for me to email samples, so if people are curious they can just inbox me their email and I'll shoot some samples off.
 
LonerMatt said:
I think I've said it before, but I'll repeat it - it's MUCH easier for me to email samples, so if people are curious they can just inbox me their email and I'll shoot some samples off.
Click to expand...

I recall your saying that, now that you mention it, but this is a public discussion forum...

It's also pretty darn easy to post pics here as well. If you have questions or are unsure how to do so, we can help you out.
 
Last edited:
The main reason I haven't posted anything is that I don't really upload the worst images - which is where the biggest difference lies. The good ones (what I end up keeping in terms of composition, scanning and editing) are all good. I also only see differences when I crop or zoom in, though I suppose people can always download the images and zoom in. Anyway, here are some images to look at.

Here are a few images from different places:

Photoghost:
111 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
109 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
105 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
CNV000023 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr

Photo Express
98 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
23 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr

CC
74 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
80 by Mr.Dunne, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Posted two 24-shot Vista 400 films off to Filmdev yesterday afternoon. About 2:30 today I got a call saying they were done, paid, and got the WeTransfer email a few minutes later! They send zipped high compression JPEGs via the WeTransfer system, but the higher quality JPEGs and TIFFs should arrive on a CD tomorrow. Pretty good service, I think.

He commented on the images, saying some looked a little soft, and some frames were blank. First attempt at pinhole, and didn't always remember to take the lens cap off, so not surprising!
 
Does anyone know if ASDA still offer their c41 35mm service? And is there a list of stores that offer the service?

I'm based in London and remember Canary Wharf having it but that was about 5 years ago!

Sorry if this is discussed somewhere else :)
 
stoo31 said:
Does anyone know if ASDA still offer their c41 35mm service? And is there a list of stores that offer the service?

I'm based in London and remember Canary Wharf having it but that was about 5 years ago!

Sorry if this is discussed somewhere else :)
Click to expand...

It's a bit hit and miss I think, my local one still develops but I know some have stopped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top