Sam's just gave up the ghost

[paul_dulaney1]

<p>My Sam's store just removed the film processor. No more $4.25 film processing. I will now have to pay more than double that to get my film processed and printed!!!!!!!!!!! I would seek professional counseling but I won't be able to afford it. I guess I should have seen this coming. I voiced my complaint to a co-worker who replied, "Why don't you just get a digital camera!??????"</p>

[wblynch]

<p>Try Costco. Lower prices and better quality.</p>

[Member69643]

<p>I hear that Walmart does a sendout service even when they don't have processors in-house. I've also heard they don't return negatives. I haven't had any film done by outside entities in years, although I do plan to send some 110 Film to Dwayne's soon. Not cheap, but maybe worth it.</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>One of the Costco locations (in Sacramento, CA) has stopped developing film. Another locations still processes film, but for how much longer.</p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>"Why don't you just get a digital camera?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's a good question considering that you just bring your film somewhere where you are asked such a question anyway.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve_parrott]

<p>Sorry, but I have to agree with the point made by John H. If you are using such a place as Sams to process your film, I don't see that you would lose anything using a digital camera. I simply cannot understand anyone putting their film in the hands of people pushing buttons at a place like Sams. The reason we use film is for the very special "something" that it gives our photography. Then to turn it over to the lowest common denominator for processing is totally contradictory to the whole point of it all, at least as I see it. I would no more use a place like Sams to process my film than I would use them to make digital prints for a client taken with a high end DSLR. Sorry, but I just cannot fathom anyone who is even aware of this forum using a chain department store to handle their film. It is the tangible, irreplaceable element of our art, and a few extra dollars is well worth it to me to have it in the hands of real pros in a real lab.</p>

[wblynch]

ANYONE using film for ANY reason, by ANY means, is a GOOD thing.

[c_watson1]

<p>"<em>I simply cannot understand anyone putting their film in the hands of people pushing buttons at a place like Sams</em>."</p>

<p>Er, cost? Surviving pro labs in my area(Toronto)will develop but not print from 35mm or other film materials any longer. Anyone still after an inexpensive set of 4x6 prints from a 24/36 shot roll is nearly out of luck without paying 3-4x for the same--or inferior--quality.Vanished mini-labs at Sam's, Walmart and Costco(once the best of the lot), along with pro labs, are the result of decisions made beginning a decade ago by all photographers, pro or otherwise. Demand for film service tanked and led labs--pro or otherwise--to limit and finally cease processing.</p>

<p>Seems a bit cold to chap someone unwilling(maybe even unable)to pay a great deal more for processing and printing that now may not be available locally.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Hence the circular 'wisdom' of the store clerk's question.</p>

[steve_parrott]

<p>Exactly John H. Exactly, .... but they don't seem to be getting the point. Using film is not a cheap endeavor by any means. If you are going to degrade film photography with anything but the very best from beginning to end, then you might as well use digital. </p>

[c_watson1]

<p><em>"Exactly John H. Exactly, .... but they don't seem to be getting the point. Using film is not a cheap endeavor by any means. If you are going to degrade film photography with anything but the very best from beginning to end, then you might as well use digital."</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Nothing puts people off film faster than this sort of conceit. Still lots of ways to "do' analog today. Why so prissy and dismissive?<em><br /></em></p>

[john_h.1]

I might characterize my own point differently. While the cheap and less than discerning processing may have been adequate, if it is going to cost much much more with no improvement in quality control, the clerk's question seems quite reasonable in context to the larger issue here. Its a fair question. Why bother if it means paying much much more for essentially the same low grade work? Only Paul knows if it is worth it for him.

[paul_dulaney1]

 

<p>Steve's post:<br>

"Sorry, but I have to agree with the point made by John H. If you are using such a place as Sams to process your film, I don't see that you would lose anything using a digital camera. I simply cannot understand anyone putting their film in the hands of people pushing buttons at a place like Sams. The reason we use film is for the very special "something" that it gives our photography. Then to turn it over to the lowest common denominator for processing is totally contradictory to the whole point of it all, at least as I see it. I would no more use a place like Sams to process my film than I would use them to make digital prints for a client taken with a high end DSLR. Sorry, but I just cannot fathom anyone who is even aware of this forum using a chain department store to handle their film. It is the tangible, irreplaceable element of our art, and a few extra dollars is well worth it to me to have it in the hands of real pros in a real lab."</p>

<p>Let me comment on this:<br>

I started into photography as a hobby in 1971 and did my own B&W processing for a number of years. I have several Canon DSLR's but like many of you, I just love film photography. I had problems with Sam's Club processing years ago but have been very pleased the past few years. I've done several comparisons with a pro lab in my area and see virtually no difference in quality. I think Sam's actually used the same Fuji processor as the pro lab. I agree that film photogrpaphy is no longer economical and we will have to pay the piper if we want to continue in this hobby. However, I am an amateur on a budget and unable to pass high processing costs along to someone else. One of the reasons I shot Kodachrome for years was the lower processing cost. (I'm now glad I did so) At the end of the day, our skills as photographers are more important than what lab processes our film. </p>

 

[steve_parrott]

<p>Very true Paul, (skill being the most important issue), but your skill in producing the photos is worthless if the wrong lab ruins your film... right? All I am saying in all of this is that you are ALWAYS at risk whenever ANYONE else is handling your film. To me, that risk factor is far lower when it is in the hands of a long established pro lab rather than a chain store. The final end quality of pro lab development vs. chain store development may be none at all. The real difference is that you are much more likely to always have good quality with the pro lab. It is, to me, a much lower risk factor to use a pro lab.</p>

<p>Sorry if I have rubbed some people the wrong way on this thread, but whenever I have read of some horror story about what happened to someone's film at a place such as Walmart or Sams or Walgreens etc, I cannot help but think, "well, you asked for it". A place like Sams is fine to develop snapshots from a disposable 35mm, but I am simply NOT going to turn over any "serious" work to such a place. To each his own though. If you are willing to take that risk to save a few dollars, that is your choice, but I cannot have any sympathy for anyone who does that when something goes wrong.</p>

<p>Happy shooting everyone! </p>

 

[eddy_d]

<p>Walmart owns Sam's club, so in essence, it is the same thing.</p>

[paul_dulaney1]

<p>Steve, your points are well taken. I actually entertained the idea of having the film processed and scanning the negatives myself but my scanner (Canon 8800F) does not produce very good results with color print film. </p>

[25asa]

<p>Our lab still processes C41 for the time being. We will lose our processor at some point should the thing ever break down or be sent to another lab needing the machine more then us. Not only that, but our cost of doing film has tripled in the last 3 years. People just don't want to pay that much anymore, so the amount of film we get now is like a few rolls a day at best. Its becoming extremely difficult to continue doing film in todays world. I use both film and digital, but I only shoot film for special occasions, or when I just want to shoot some B&W. I don't shoot C41 film anymore in 35mm. I still have medium format gear, but it doesn't get used much these days either. I have a 24 megapixel SLR which does mostly what I need done.</p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Walgreens did my developing and scanning for C-41 B&W (which I rarely shoot now since going to a darkroom), and they looked really good. No image degradation at all, depending on who was on the film detail that day in the store. It's $9 or so for developing and scans, no prints. This may be a good opportunity for you to start developing yourself. The materials aren't expensive, and if I can learn how to do it, anyone can.</p>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>My local Costco still develops color film, but I can't help but wonder for how much longer. Talking to one of the techs one day, he thinks it's doubtful that any of their developing machines will be replaced when they finally wear out. This store has been open since 2001, so it made sense to install film developing equipment back then. Another Costco opened up a few miles farther away in about 2008. From the day their doors opened, they did not handle film. Only prints from negatives -- using one of those giant Epson printers.</p>

<p>I have Costco do all my color film developing and they've always done an excellent job. And their film lab folks are "just" button pushers. Probably the same as the button pushers at Dwayne's, truth be told.</p>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>Oops, I meant prints from digital, not negatives. They don't handle film processing of any sort at the new Costco here.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>Go on, say it "play it again Sam"</p>