I'm a big tinkerer, I've fixed my own "broken" lenses and develop my own color, b&w film and even reload by buying tins of film, 100/400ft rolls of vision3 and HP5 mostly. I even got super lucky and found a v600 local for 20 bucks, so I can and do dev & scan. It's absolutely not for everyone and is time consuming, but I find it all very fun and is now part of the love I have for the hobby.
This is absolutely amazing. I’ve heard that re-spooling film is the best way to shoot film on the cheap. Does reloading film take any special equipment?
@@kevikronicles yes it does, most important part is u need a special tool. Its a box-shaped film respooler, i got one which brand Dayroll. then u need some of emptied filmroll. and finally a dark bag. Then its just kinda easy to do, u can do some research on youtube and surely having no problem doing it
@@kevikronicles In addition, fomapan bulk film is crazy cheap, around $50 for a 400ft bulk of fomapan 400. there come 20~21 rolls of 36ex for $2.5 each. HP5 and vision3 is more expensive, but still a pretty decent price.
Its not possible in India. Here film photography is dead like dodo. Film is expensive and rare. For developing and scanning, we need to send it to bangalore or delhi which is 1000&3000 km respectively. Its better to buy a ccd camera. That too is rare
Tru tru I've recently started shooting in film in india , shit is really expensive, got a yashika fx3 for 6k and kodak kodak ultramax reel , 1.5k , development cost of 1.5k
@@saitejageddada3109 why the F nothing good happen in our country..cameras are expensive... Cars are expensive..have very less options for everything...
@@saitejageddada3109 do you think a film veteran care about film roll being sold at 1.5 k... I love film photography.. Planning to buy a film slr.. But prices are too high.. And these labs in bangalore and delhi not that good at developing
Please stop paying 200 to 300 bucks for a Canon AE1. If you want a focal plane shutter camera get literally any Minolta SRT for literally a tenth of the cost of an AE1. I have no clue why it's sucha popular option when there's many many better options within that time period alone. I know you are just using it as an example since it was handed down to you and everything. It's a fine camera just not the first choice, especially at that price. I own one and like it, only really bought it to use the FD mount glass I've found over the years, and when I found an AE1 at a swap meet that was good condition I swooped, I think at the time it set me back like 40 bucks or so. I really really do like the included 50MM 1.4 that came with it though, it's the sharpest 50 I've ever used. It's right back like the 80's when literally the name "program" would sell the camera haha. In that price range you can get so much more value from like a Pentax LX or something
i shoot medium format and luckily since the release of kodak gold 200 ive been able to shoot as much color film as i like as its only like 6.50 a roll and i do my own development so its super affordable.
@@kevikronicles scanning is such a drag though, I absolutely hate it especially color. That’s why I only use b&w for 35mm film because scanning and converting 36 pictures is just too much work. When I shoot medium format I’m fine with scanning color because it’s only 12-10 images per roll so it’s only 1:3 as much work
I develop, scan and print at home. I buy chemicals once every year or two. I buy film every couple of weeks. I have a job and make enough money to budget for film so it’s still affordable for me to shoot film. I did buy a new M6 reissue and a Leica lens which has been my biggest photography expense to date, but even with that, it’s still affordable. If I was taking my film to a lab to get it developed, scanned and printed, the cost would go up dramatically.
In the past, I always complained about the price of film and cameras, but now I am busy with work and family and have no time to go out and take pictures.
Just an idea maybe pick up a cheap point and shoot and take a picture of your family? I know in my personal experience the most important photos to me are the simple ones of my family just hanging out together. And I know you can just pull out your phone and snap a photo but I dont know there’s something that feels more intentional about film that makes me appreciate the photos so much more. But man I get it. Film and development costs are a lot.
today 7 August 2024 in UK, a roll of 35 total costs you £30 including film + developing + TIFF scan. Camera is £23 Canon EOS 1000FN, I already have lenses though, 7 lenses (they costs a lot) but you can buy cheap 2nd hand from a professional camera shop. £4 for 6x4 prints. All B&W
Wow! Ive shot close to 80 rolls of film in a year which ran me about 280$ and spent about 120$ on chemistry. Color film is ungodly expensive! Also, try home scanning!
I'm lucky enough to have a camera store one beautiful 50 minute bicycle ride away from me that still does in-house development every week. I can drop my rolls off on Tuesday and pick them up on Thursday. I scan the film myself, and their cost for development alone is €5 per roll. They even cut it into strips of six negatives and put them into a binder sleeve for that price. Very nice. The scanner I use (a PlusTek Opticfilm 8200i SE) cost me about €350 brand new. My camera store's scanning fee is another €6 per roll for low res scans so the scanner pays itself off after about sixty rolls of film, or a few years of shooting. Not too bad for getting scans that are much higher resolution than what I'd get from the store. All in all I'm in a pretty good spot when it comes to film. Part of that has got to be the fact that the medium never truly died here.
The lab that I use does development and scanning together. So the scanning is included in the development prices I listed. Sorry if that wasn’t very clear.
@@kevikronicles Thanks! I was listening on my way. Now that I calculated, you accounted $16/roll for development and scanning, which aligns with my experience. My local lab in Boston, MA offers a development-only service for $8/roll. This implies home scanning, which is just as fun as the shooting itself, and arguably has almost as much influence on the final outcome as taking the picture. However, home scanning gets really expensive as soon as you want to match the lab quality scans: $500 for a dedicated scanner, $200-300 for software. So, by the most conservative estimate, it takes $700/$8 = 87.5 rolls to break even with lab scanning, and I surely didn’t factor in the time it takes to scan so many rolls manually! Nevertheless, I chose the home scanning route, because I love the process and the control it gives over my images. But it’s hell of an expensive hobby!
@@istvann.huszar420 You spend once on a scanner and they don't all cost an arm and a leg. I have one of the more common Plustec scanners that does a great job. I scan a lot of my old pictures on thousands of strips of film and mounted slides. Remember, many of us have pictures, slides and negatives from last century and buying a scanner is a plus for us. Today, if you like, you can use your camera to scan film. There are a few videos of such a thing. It shows how to set up your camera, a light box and film holder, all at very low cost.
Yep you're exactly right. My development plus scanning comes out to $16 a roll. Its not terrible but man does it add up fast. So expensive but so worth it. Thanks for paying so much attention to the video it really means a lot to me.
@@istvann.huszar420actually if you buy a proper scanner you will have tiff files, which are archival and far better than any lab scan (Heidelberg and Imacons excluded). Silverfast and a nikon 5000 removes the dust and you have negafix - superior to NLP. You are undervaluing home scanning. It is worth far more.
i'm lucky enough to have played around with film before lockdown, where shooting+developing a roll of Colorplus 200 (my favorite film) only costs ~$5.00. nowadays i just shoot mostly on my iphone and just slap some grain and glow on them pics in Snapseed lmao.
Your figures do not add up. It is nowhere near this expensive to shoot film. You can a) bulk load rolls of b+w film; b) develop yourself (i.e. cinestill). An example, fomapan 100ft roll is like $60 and gives 18 rolls of 36 ct. cinestill monograph develops 18 rolls for $20. Minus the labour you just did 18 rolls for under $100 (even if you add in reusable cartridges, used paterson tank etc). Scan yourself and buy a simple canon cp1300 4x6 printer (under $100) and you will have saved all that money. You can buy colour film in bulk and develop it but costs a little more. Sorry mate but you are not telling an accurate story.
I'm a big tinkerer, I've fixed my own "broken" lenses and develop my own color, b&w film and even reload by buying tins of film, 100/400ft rolls of vision3 and HP5 mostly. I even got super lucky and found a v600 local for 20 bucks, so I can and do dev & scan. It's absolutely not for everyone and is time consuming, but I find it all very fun and is now part of the love I have for the hobby.
This is absolutely amazing. I’ve heard that re-spooling film is the best way to shoot film on the cheap. Does reloading film take any special equipment?
@@kevikronicles yes it does, most important part is u need a special tool. Its a box-shaped film respooler, i got one which brand Dayroll. then u need some of emptied filmroll. and finally a dark bag. Then its just kinda easy to do, u can do some research on youtube and surely having no problem doing it
@@kevikronicles In addition, fomapan bulk film is crazy cheap, around $50 for a 400ft bulk of fomapan 400. there come 20~21 rolls of 36ex for $2.5 each. HP5 and vision3 is more expensive, but still a pretty decent price.
Exactly. This video mentions none of that. This bloke is paying retail because he don’t bulk load or develop.
Its not possible in India. Here film photography is dead like dodo. Film is expensive and rare. For developing and scanning, we need to send it to bangalore or delhi which is 1000&3000 km respectively. Its better to buy a ccd camera. That too is rare
Oh that breaks my heart.
Tru tru I've recently started shooting in film in india , shit is really expensive, got a yashika fx3 for 6k and kodak kodak ultramax reel , 1.5k , development cost of 1.5k
@@saitejageddada3109 why the F nothing good happen in our country..cameras are expensive... Cars are expensive..have very less options for everything...
@@oblivion_007 can't expect too much man, what about you , are you like a film veteran or something
@@saitejageddada3109 do you think a film veteran care about film roll being sold at 1.5 k... I love film photography.. Planning to buy a film slr.. But prices are too high.. And these labs in bangalore and delhi not that good at developing
Please stop paying 200 to 300 bucks for a Canon AE1. If you want a focal plane shutter camera get literally any Minolta SRT for literally a tenth of the cost of an AE1. I have no clue why it's sucha popular option when there's many many better options within that time period alone. I know you are just using it as an example since it was handed down to you and everything. It's a fine camera just not the first choice, especially at that price. I own one and like it, only really bought it to use the FD mount glass I've found over the years, and when I found an AE1 at a swap meet that was good condition I swooped, I think at the time it set me back like 40 bucks or so. I really really do like the included 50MM 1.4 that came with it though, it's the sharpest 50 I've ever used. It's right back like the 80's when literally the name "program" would sell the camera haha. In that price range you can get so much more value from like a Pentax LX or something
i shoot medium format and luckily since the release of kodak gold 200 ive been able to shoot as much color film as i like as its only like 6.50 a roll and i do my own development so its super affordable.
Oh hell yeah! Development and scanning is the real money killer. I need to get my own development situation.
@@kevikronicles scanning is such a drag though, I absolutely hate it especially color. That’s why I only use b&w for 35mm film because scanning and converting 36 pictures is just too much work. When I shoot medium format I’m fine with scanning color because it’s only 12-10 images per roll so it’s only 1:3 as much work
I develop, scan and print at home. I buy chemicals once every year or two. I buy film every couple of weeks. I have a job and make enough money to budget for film so it’s still affordable for me to shoot film. I did buy a new M6 reissue and a Leica lens which has been my biggest photography expense to date, but even with that, it’s still affordable. If I was taking my film to a lab to get it developed, scanned and printed, the cost would go up dramatically.
The more I shoot the more I’m realizing I need to start doing my own developing. Man I’m jealous you have the M6 that’s an absolute dream of a camera.
Also I checked out your channel and I have to say the images you take are top tier man. Seriously I’m a fan great work.
In the past, I always complained about the price of film and cameras, but now I am busy with work and family and have no time to go out and take pictures.
In China, the cost of buying Kodak Gold 200 film and developing it is about 20 US dollars now.
Just an idea maybe pick up a cheap point and shoot and take a picture of your family? I know in my personal experience the most important photos to me are the simple ones of my family just hanging out together. And I know you can just pull out your phone and snap a photo but I dont know there’s something that feels more intentional about film that makes me appreciate the photos so much more. But man I get it. Film and development costs are a lot.
today 7 August 2024 in UK, a roll of 35 total costs you £30 including film + developing + TIFF scan.
Camera is £23 Canon EOS 1000FN, I already have lenses though, 7 lenses (they costs a lot) but you can buy cheap 2nd hand from a professional camera shop. £4 for 6x4 prints. All B&W
This is great to know. I’ll be moving to the UK in a couple years so thanks for letting me know film and development prices. Much appreciated.
@@kevikronicles This is from a professional lab. Jack's lab in Bristol, I never do supermarket or quick snap shop.
Good to know. Ill have to give them a try when i get to the UK.
Wow! Ive shot close to 80 rolls of film in a year which ran me about 280$ and spent about 120$ on chemistry. Color film is ungodly expensive! Also, try home scanning!
I definitely need to start doing home scanning.
"Back in 2021" lol I got my first pentax back in 1972...
Hahaha right. I talk like 2021 was forever ago. But most of these cameras are older than me.
Even with home scanning its fucking expensive. Im switching to doing mostly digital and some film as just a treat
That’s the truth.
I'm lucky enough to have a camera store one beautiful 50 minute bicycle ride away from me that still does in-house development every week. I can drop my rolls off on Tuesday and pick them up on Thursday. I scan the film myself, and their cost for development alone is €5 per roll. They even cut it into strips of six negatives and put them into a binder sleeve for that price. Very nice.
The scanner I use (a PlusTek Opticfilm 8200i SE) cost me about €350 brand new. My camera store's scanning fee is another €6 per roll for low res scans so the scanner pays itself off after about sixty rolls of film, or a few years of shooting. Not too bad for getting scans that are much higher resolution than what I'd get from the store.
All in all I'm in a pretty good spot when it comes to film. Part of that has got to be the fact that the medium never truly died here.
Oh man you’re so lucky! That whole process sounds perfect.
Great video, but where are the costs of scanning?!
The lab that I use does development and scanning together. So the scanning is included in the development prices I listed. Sorry if that wasn’t very clear.
@@kevikronicles Thanks! I was listening on my way. Now that I calculated, you accounted $16/roll for development and scanning, which aligns with my experience. My local lab in Boston, MA offers a development-only service for $8/roll. This implies home scanning, which is just as fun as the shooting itself, and arguably has almost as much influence on the final outcome as taking the picture. However, home scanning gets really expensive as soon as you want to match the lab quality scans: $500 for a dedicated scanner, $200-300 for software. So, by the most conservative estimate, it takes $700/$8 = 87.5 rolls to break even with lab scanning, and I surely didn’t factor in the time it takes to scan so many rolls manually! Nevertheless, I chose the home scanning route, because I love the process and the control it gives over my images. But it’s hell of an expensive hobby!
@@istvann.huszar420 You spend once on a scanner and they don't all cost an arm and a leg. I have one of the more common Plustec scanners that does a great job. I scan a lot of my old pictures on thousands of strips of film and mounted slides. Remember, many of us have pictures, slides and negatives from last century and buying a scanner is a plus for us. Today, if you like, you can use your camera to scan film. There are a few videos of such a thing. It shows how to set up your camera, a light box and film holder, all at very low cost.
Yep you're exactly right. My development plus scanning comes out to $16 a roll. Its not terrible but man does it add up fast. So expensive but so worth it. Thanks for paying so much attention to the video it really means a lot to me.
@@istvann.huszar420actually if you buy a proper scanner you will have tiff files, which are archival and far better than any lab scan (Heidelberg and Imacons excluded). Silverfast and a nikon 5000 removes the dust and you have negafix - superior to NLP. You are undervaluing home scanning. It is worth far more.
i'm lucky enough to have played around with film before lockdown, where shooting+developing a roll of Colorplus 200 (my favorite film) only costs ~$5.00. nowadays i just shoot mostly on my iphone and just slap some grain and glow on them pics in Snapseed lmao.
Your figures do not add up. It is nowhere near this expensive to shoot film. You can a) bulk load rolls of b+w film; b) develop yourself (i.e. cinestill). An example, fomapan 100ft roll is like $60 and gives 18 rolls of 36 ct. cinestill monograph develops 18 rolls for $20. Minus the labour you just did 18 rolls for under $100 (even if you add in reusable cartridges, used paterson tank etc). Scan yourself and buy a simple canon cp1300 4x6 printer (under $100) and you will have saved all that money. You can buy colour film in bulk and develop it but costs a little more.
Sorry mate but you are not telling an accurate story.