Walmart no longer returns negatives !!!

[Jeffrey L.T. von Glück]

<p>For those of you in northern NJ (Bergen and Hudson Counties), the CVS in Edgewater is still developing and printing 35mm film. I haven't used them so I'm not sure of the quality, but you do get your negatives back as everything is done on site in their minilab.</p>

<p>Costco, however, is still the cheapest and the best quality locally (Hackensack).</p>

<p>The Target in North Bergen was doing film as of several months ago but the quality poor -- negatives scratched, chemistry dirty, employees totally disinterested, almost annoyed to be bothered serving you.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>First as I said before not returning negatives is just stupid.<br>

I can understand why the convenient 1 hour in store labs are gone.<br>

Ours was excellent. but the new store only has machines to print from digital media.<br>

if the volume of film processed is low the chemicals will go bad or cost more to replace.<br>

But if the film is sent to a remote location like dwaynes, <br>

and the wait time is about a week., I see no reason why it cannot <br>

at $7.00 for d&p on a 24 exp roll of c-41<br>

and the lower charge if you did not have to pay shipping ( very high) back from dwaynes ( or fuji or whatever)\<br>

it is still profitable. That little box in the store with that slot takes up 2 square feet.<br>

and the store has no headaches to deal with.</p>

<p>Just keep the envelope slot filles.<br>

I fail to see the reasoning.<br>

also It increases the Volume for dwaynes -or whoever.<br>

and reduces there overall costs.<br>

Since Walmart and target especially walmart<br>

are traveling ALL over the country, It is no big deal for them to pick up a box of fimnisghed photos or take evneloped from each store and deliver them.<br>

I can see no downside to this.<br>

the costs associated with sending photos and cd images to store<br>

my be lower, but what do 20? rolls of film or 20 rolls of developed film and prints cost to ride on a truck that is going all over anyway.</p>

<p>I think it is a stupid move<br>

the argument that it brings people into the store is not valid.<br>

I recall going from store to store dragges by my wife looking for stuff we never found.</p>

[wblynch]

<p>Well, the Wal-Marts, Targets, CVS, Costcos and the rest put in 1-hour photo services to get you in the door (as mentioned above) and killed the Mom and Pops that proliferated in the 1990's.<br>

<br />Now the Mom and Pops are gone, the chains realize there's no money to be made.</p>

<p>I see this as an opportunity for new Mom and Pops. It isn't like video rentals, where Blockbuseter and The Wherehouse put all the locals out of business, only to die themselves just a few years later. That rental business was supplanted by Netflix and online streaming.</p>

<p>But, you can't online stream film and still return the negatives.</p>

<p>Enterprising people can build new photo stores that serve both digital and film in better ways than before. But they have to make wise moves and position themselves well in the community.</p>

<p>There is a new movement towards quality and of course everyone is value conscious. But there it is.</p>

<p>Wal-Mart may not want your money but smaller stores might do quite well in the new market.</p>

<p> </p>

[wblynch]

<p>Bring back the Fotomat! :)</p>

 

[Jeffrey L.T. von Glück]

<p>Bill,</p>

<p>You're 100% right, the big boxers put the mom-and-pop retailers out of business, now they face no competition and can stop film processing without affecting their bottom line. </p>

<p>Even if there is a return of mom-and-op niche retailers, they will not be able to beat Costco's prices of $1.59 to develop, 10 cents a print and $2.99 burn to CD. OTOH, once all the chains drop film processing, niche stores can charge what they want.</p>

<p>Personally, I think C-41 processing will all go to mail order once the Costcos, Targets, et al. go fully digital.</p>

[tripp_frasch]

<p>Any thoughts on what would happen if you dropped off E-6 for their "send out" service? In the past, this has been a popular option for many especially since it is likely Dwayne's that does the actual processing... Also what about if you drop off 120?</p>

[donbright]

<p>But if the Costco's, Targets go fully digital, what do they have? A printer? What printer? A printer that will deliver, and render your fine image in a way that it deserves? Labs that develop and print film usually are equipped with superior printers that have a wide color gamut. I doubt department stores are going to prioritize to a sophisticated printer to keep the discriminating digital Photographer happy. You may say, well then E-mail your images to a Pro-lab. It still falls under inconvenience for some people in different locals. The concept of superior service in general is in jeopardy in our country let alone Photography.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>if I can get someone in Arkasas on the phone tomorrow<br>

I will asks them about e-6 and 120<br>

I do wonder if they can scan 120 ? or develop B&W<br>

Hmm keep my B&W negatives ( if I did not do them myself)</p>

<p>Dwaynes still did not answer me. </p>

 

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>What printer? A printer that will deliver, and render your fine image in a way that it deserves? Labs that develop and print film usually are equipped with superior printers that have a wide color gamut.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

My local Costco uses Nortsu 3111 printers with Crystal Archive paper operated by people who just operate the equipment. For larger prints, they use Epson 7880 pigment printers. The profiles for the printers are available online so that neither the machine nor the operator is making color choices. The local Walgreens that develops film has an older Frontier printer operated by people who are also cashiers. Although there was one teen who worked there for a couple years, most people seem to come and go. Quality has nothing to do with what they print.<br>

</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>You may say, well then E-mail your images to a Pro-lab. It still falls under inconvenience for some people in different locals. The concept of superior service in general is in jeopardy in our country let alone Photography.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

I can upload my photos to mpix or WHCC and get them back in the mail in two days. I'm not sure how that could be an inconvenience to anyone. If I need prints same day I can go to Costco. This is a terrible argument, many of the places that process film, such as Walmart, Target and Walgreens care less about the customer than the high volume stores and mail order companies.

 

<p> </p>

[donbright]

<p>Jeff, The Noritsu printer, is it a stand alone printer? or is it a develop and print machine. I don't know. Also, the Costco here does a great job, I'll ask.</p>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>In talking to some folks, it looks as though Fuji might have ticked off Walmart to the point that they are getting rid of the C-41 machines from many of the 300 stores. It was also mentioned that the chemistry is expensive and that at least the local Walmart store that does pretty well has doubled their price in the past few months on film developing. <br /> It stands to reason that this might be more on the supplier of chemistry than Walmart in that they have increased the prices on C-41 to the point that the price the customer now pays has hit the numbers hard enough to have Walmart Corporate consider a consolidation of the service. <br /> Wolf Camera got rid of a lot of in store C41 a couple years ago, the store in our town is now gone...<br>

<br /> Something on the supply side is doing this, Target got rid of C41, Walmart is about to and Wolf did as well...Walmart now claims that film will be sent out, then scanned on site and the data loaded onto a sever at the store where the prints will be made at and given to the customer, sans negs...</p>

[william_y]

<p>Daniel, I follow your reasoning but I don't agree. There will be always be SOME market for film, and Fuji is the only major manufacturer left. It would make no sense for Fuji to force everyone who processes their film out of business when they have the film market cornered.</p>

<p>No, I think it has only to do with the fact that at least the big retailers don't want to screw with film anymore. My guess is down the road the only places left to get film processed will be mom and pop shops, and they will be able to charge a fortune for the service. Unless...... some major retail player gets smart and figures out there is still a film processing market to make money from. I have no plans at all to go digital. The more I see and hear about it the less interested I am.</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>It would make no sense for Fuji to force everyone who processes their film out of business when they have the film market cornered.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They may have the processing world "cornered" but they don't have the entire film world "cornered." Anyway Walmart is consolidating... not getting rid of C-41 developing.</p>

[wblynch]

<p>There is no reason that Mom and Pops (if they did return) would be free to charge any price they like. There is always a market reality where one can price themselves right out of business.</p>

<p>In the case of Wal-Mart and others, if they considered film processing a loss-leader to drive store visits they must have determined there is now too little return on that loss.</p>

<p>They were subsidizing the price and giving a false sense of the cost of services. Of course Mom and Pops should not be expected to do the same.</p>

<p>I believe there is money to be made somewhere in the middle but certainly any new labs have to offer more than film processing alone or they won't survive.</p>

<p>A very small part-time business that takes in film and processes it in a garage somewhere once or twice a week might be able to get by on film alone.</p>

<p>Either way, it's getting tougher.</p>

 

[DB_Gallery]

<p>William, sorry if I gave you the impression that there is not a market for film. I mean, good god, look at this thread I started:<br>

http://www.photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00acNR<br>

I was just passing on info, I will talk to Dwayne's tomorrow. Blue Moon Camera who does wonderful optical, not scanned RA-4 prints from negatives said today that they have not seen any spikes in price on C-41 chemistry, just the regular, expect price increases one seas over the course of the year.<br>

So I am still trying to see if I can find out why big box retailers are dumping C41 all at the same time like this...</p>

[skip_a]

<p>Don Bright said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Costco is not the problem. They are the solution. They do great work, and their proud of it, I can sense it within the workforce at the Costco lab.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Psul aul said:</p>

<blockquote>I agree with the above posts about Costco. They do a great job, the employees care and its very affordable. $3.99 develop and print a roll of 24. Add an extra 2.99 to burn a CD. We need to keep using them (and other film processors) so they will keep doing it!</blockquote>

<p>I thought this too until my Costco stopped processing film. I had some film processed there about six weeks ago. Two weeks ago I went in with another roll of film and discovered that their film processor and printer is gone. They only do digital printing on an ink jet printer now. There is another Costco several miles further away that still does film processing, but for how long is a question.</p>

[skip_a]

<p>A lot of people who can't afford digital cameras still buy and use the single-use film cameras that come pre-loaded with film. Or they only buy and use the regular consumer film (which is perfectly good film, by the way) that is still sold in drug stores and probably even in Walmart. It's very possible that a significant number of these people don't really care about the negatives. They just want prints. If they can get prints and digital scans on a CD, all the better. For these kinds of film users, the new Walmart "service" may seem perfectly fine. If they get their prints and CD sooner than they would compared to waiting for the negatives to be returned with the accompanying prints and CD, they may see it as an improvement.<br>

<br />What Walmart is offering seems fine to me, so long as the people who are using the service are aware that they wont get their negatives back and they accept that. I'm sure these same people know they could send their film to a lab that will return their negatives, or that they could take their film to Walgreens or CVS or another store that still processes film. </p>

<p>I wonder if Walmart considered offering to return film to people who want it as an extra-cost item? I'm sure they could justify charging for something that used to be free (included in the price of processing) based on the added cost relative to their standard offering. They might actually be able to make money on it from photographers who value their negatives.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>as said the email from walmard was " digital era "stuff I doubt the person ever saw a negative.<br>

the ladies at walmart assured me they DID get negatives back.<br>

but yes the envelope has changes still no NO NEGATIVED sign.<br>

I do not believe or trust them<br>

I will call and talk to a real person not sole low level person who does not know anything.<br>

Dwaynes STILL did not reply<br>

I will call it is free for me.<br>

But I have a lab lined up<br>

the extra charge for negatives is interesting.</p>

[wblynch]

<p>Photographers who value their negatives won't use Wal-Mart.</p>

<p>In the meantime I saw prepaid processing envelopes at Target. $9.99 plus tax for "any size" roll of 35mm C-41 or a disposable camera. Still more than Costco but I might try one just for kicks.</p>

<p>It does not say if you get your negatives back but it's hard to imagine them not returning with the prints, since they are mailed.</p>

 

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>Everything has changed (and this is fairly recent).<br />Their deposit envelope now has only one option: develop and print and get a CD and NO NEGATIVES.<br />Gone is the regular or premium choice. Gone is the 4" or 5" choice. Gone is the CD or no-CD choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong>I was on the road and checked a Walmart in New England. EVERYTHING looked exactly like it did at every other Walmart I've used for months.</strong> The envelope was the exact same as it's always been. No signs about "no negatives returned." I actually have a stack of mailers at home and just fill them out as needed (minimizes the amount of time I have to be in Wally World). I actually dropped my 120 Portra 160 roll off and the lady there said the negatives would magically find their way back to the Walmart on the address label which is close to where I live. She said you can drop the film off at ANY Walmart in the US and it will find it's way home. I don't know how true that is but it will be a fun experiment. I'll keep you guys posted. If this Wally World teleportation trick works it means you can use Walmart send out service envelopes from your home base as a mail out service when you are on the road in America.</p>

<p>I attached a picture of a Walmart send out service envelope I picked up today. Seems the same to me. Sorry for the lousy picture quality... It's a cell phone picture.</p><div></div>

[william_y]

<p>This whole campaign to eliminate film and film processing is a big capitalist scam. It's planned obsolescence. It's just like any other manufacturer selling you something and then discontinuing parts so that you have to buy new before you want or need to. I'm telling you we should not put up with this. This is bullshit. Why the hell would I want to pay $1000 for a digital camera when I have a film cameras that produce higher quality photos? And from what I've heard, digital cameras have a pretty limited lifespan anyway; when they quit working you basically just have to throw them away and spend another $1000 for another one. It's bullshit.</p>

<p> </p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>This whole campaign to eliminate film and film processing is a big capitalist scam.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Take it easy, Occupy. Whether you are buying film or digital cameras you are forking over money to "capitalists." Believe me the "capitalists" over at Kodak wish film would make a huge comeback.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>And from what I've heard, digital cameras have a pretty limited lifespan anyway; when they quit working you basically just have to throw them away and spend another $1000 for another one. It's bullshit.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Let me guess, some dolt told you DSLRs are "obsolete" in <1 year. Am I right? There is absolutely no need to spend anywhere near $1,000 for a DSLR. You can get an excellent 18 megapixel DSLR from Canon for less than $500. Who in their right mind on a budget is dropping $1,000 on a DSLR? The part that usually wears out on most cameras with extended use is the shutter and that can be easily replaced... if you want to. For 90+% of the shooters out there an 18 megapixel Canon T3i is more than enough camera. There is zero need to get a new DSLR if you have that camera unless you want enhanced movie making options. The megapixel race has finally gotten to the point where you really aren't missing out on anything by not upgrading to the latest and greatest... at least not in 35mm APS sensor world.</p>

<p>Let's stop the myths about film AND digital. They both have their pros and cons and we can discuss both in reasonable terms.</p>

[william_y]

<p>To Jeff:<br>

Take it easy, Mitt. I never said there was no place for digital. If that's what you want, go for it. </p>

<p>But if I'm going to buy a new camera (and I'm NOT) what point would there be in buying one without at least as many features as my Nikon film SLR? You ain't gonna find any DSLR at WalMart for $500 that fits that description. </p>

<p>So yes, I agree, let's stop the myths.</p>

<p> </p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>To Jeff:<br /> Take it easy, Mitt.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nice come back :D I like people who can take a joke.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>But if I'm going to buy a new camera (and I'm NOT) what point would there be in buying one without at least as many features as my Nikon film SLR?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No one told YOU to buy a new camera. I just objected to that absurd $1,000 figure. If you are quoting prices that are double street price and hundreds of dollars more than LIST price it's got to get called out... has to be done. Anyway I never simply count up the number of "features" a camera has. I'm more concerned about the QUALITY of the few features I will actually use. My film MF rig takes the pictures with the best objective image quality on average and it has the fewest "features."</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>You ain't gonna find any DSLR at WalMart for $500 that fits that description.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Never bought a DSLR at Walmart... never will. Go online and check out the NY/NJ photo/electronics stores if you want to see the real street prices. Walmart is for suckers.</p>

<p>Presently I shoot more film than digital. Each one serves it's own purpose. There are lots of areas of overlap but when I want a particular "look" from a certain film it is easier for me to just shoot that film instead of shooting digital and making a poor facsimile in Photoshop... after a ton of work.</p>

[psul_aul]

<p>I don't think the $1,000 figure is that absurd if you are trying to replace a decent 35mm Nikon film camera with a digital SLR that has similiar features. Lets assume a Nikon N80 or F100. Both can be had pretty cheap on the used market right now, but to get a digital "equivalent" (I am acknowleding that there is not a perfect digital equivalent to either of these camera bodies) you'd have to go to a Nikon D7000. Like the F100 and the N80, the D7000 has two control wheels and an autofocus motor built into the body to allow autofocus with no AFS lenses. The D7000 currently is selling for $1199 at major camera retailors. The other factor is the D7000 has a dx crop sensor, which means your lenses will give you a different field of view than they did on your film camera. Which may or may not mean you have to buy new lenses too. And lets not get into the change in flash technology from regular ttl to i-ttl. <br>

So, if one has a decent 35mm film camera and wants to go to a digital slr that has similiar in features, the $1000 figure is pretty realistic if not a bit low. </p>