Who will develop my artless smut?

peter ur lewd as fuck.

love, the derproom.

>>3005758
Dev your own shit fuckboy

>>3005795
That's like saying I should grow my own crops because some manager at Whole Foods doesn't like my cooking.

>>3005758
Go digital

>>3005799
No. It's like saying you should grow your own crop because Whole Foods doesn't have the crop you require.

>>3005819
But growing your own crops is a lot of work and isn't cheap. It would be easier to see if anyone else had the crop you were looking for.

>>3005795
>>3005819

maybe he wants to be an artist and not a fucking farmer?

but, of course, this is /p/, autism headquarters.

>>3005815
Okay, but let's say I already have the film

>>3005828
Speaking of autism, it shows in your post.

It was a metaphor for the shop not having the service/product that can support him. So he is better of doing it himself.

/p/'s comprehensive skills are absolute shit.

>>3005829
Can't help you there, I have no experience with film. Perhaps see if there is a university nearby with an art department that could help you?

>>3005799

That's a terrible analogy desu.

It's more like cooking your own dinner because you can't find a restaurant that will make what you want.

>>3005844
ok

>>3005847

so learn how to develop your own smut. it's not hard. takes literally a trash bag and and some chemicals.

or shoot instant, fucktard.

>>3005848
I'd like to have somebody do that for me. To abuse your cooking analogy, I'd like to spend less time in the kitchen and more time banging whores.

>>3005799
>>3005828


you literally only have to put your film in a tank and pour chemicals in it. Then your film is developed instead of paying some guy and shipping your film and waiting days or weeks to get it back.

>>3005853

it takes much more time to drive to the shop, drop off your film, wait for at least an hour (probably more, a day or two if it's black and white), drive back and pick it up.

Takes, what, maybe 45 minutes start to finish for a roll of film.

>>3005858
>it takes much more time to drive to the shop, drop off your film, wait for at least an hour (probably more, a day or two if it's black and white), drive back and pick it up.
>Takes, what, maybe 45 minutes start to finish for a roll of film.
I'm all for self processing but this is a retarded statement if I've ever heard one.
When I get someone else to process 35mm C-41 snapshits, I give them maybe 10+ rolls at a time. It takes twenty minutes to get there and back and I'm in no huge rush to get them.
Are you saying that I could process 10-20 rolls at home in under an hour? Of course, I'm just busting your balls because not everyone will be handing in the same amount of film to be processed and it depends entirely on variables such as tank size and number of reels owned and space for drying.

>>3005863

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/40340-REG/Paterson_PTP118_Multi_Reel_8_Tank_Super.html

>>3005867
get pwned anon

>>3005867
>>3005872
Now post the cost of chemicals vs the cost of processing.

>>3005853
>Mr. O'Sullivan the labcuck
>cucked
>awkward
>always out of film because all his money goes into lab bills
>drops 15 rolls of snapshits from his meme vacation trip at the lab
>three rolls unsalvageable because the minilab hadn't been cleaned correctly and printed scratches all over the frames
>spends three weeks post processing because of the remaining rolls being also scratched and covered in dust because of dity squeegees and a burger flipper tech cutting the film by laying it on the break room's kitchen table
>post passive-aggressive rant on /p/ before dumping everything on flickr and then hanging himself
vs.
>Mr. O'Sullivan the darkroom bro
>confident and loves the art
>always seeking to perfect his technique
>inventory full of quality film and chems
>processes his 15 vacation trip rolls over the course of couple days
>consistent and in full control of the entire workflow from start to finish
>able to produce perfect results every time to the last frame with minimal to no additional time wasted on removing scratches and other defects
>not constrained or hampered by what a lab tech feels the right procedure is
>posts the best of the best online and discusses with other respectable gentlemen about techniques and ways to get even better results next time

>>3005874

The Darkroom charges about 11 bucks a roll.

You can pick up a Tetenal C-41 Press kit that will make enough chemistry for about 20-25 rolls for $27. The same amount of film developed by the Darkroom would be around $250-275, so doing it yourself is about ten times cheaper.

Black and white is considerably cheaper than that. It's somewhere around 15-30 cents a roll.

>>3005889
1. I'm rich.

File: 1482535746830.jpg (232KB, 979x832px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 979x832px

>>3005911

And yet you can't find someone to develop your snapshits, and you won't buy digital or instant because you already bought the film.

>>3005915
I have the digital, I have the instant, I wanted to fuck around with film, I didn't realize the darkroom was run by the Taliban.

>>3005884
Why did you bother typing all that? Aren't you embarrassed?

>>3005917

Well, shit. Now what are you gonna do?

>>3005922
I'll start by making a thread on /p/ to see if anyone has any advice.

>>3005924

Seems like there's some pretty sound advice in there. You gonna follow it?

File: my baby.jpg (74KB, 1046x1046px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1046x1046px

>>3005889
>The Darkroom charges about 11 bucks a roll.
I pay $3 a roll.
>>3005889
>You can pick up a Tetenal C-41 Press kit that will make enough chemistry for about 20-25 rolls for $27
I'm going to go ahead and assume you mean the powder kit listed on B&H for $27 which makes 1 litre of solution and the multi-8 tank with 10 dry reels.

It will process a maximum of three rolls at once with 1l of solution (you could buy multiple kits but shelf life and economy comes into play here). We're gonna need rapid dev since we're gonna be processing so many rolls in a row, so that's 10 and a half minutes for each roll to be processed. We have to run the process a total of four times to process 10 reels.
To load 10 reels at 30 seconds each, that's around 5 minutes of time taken. Each time the process is run you want to pre-heat the rolls in 45c water for around 2 minutes with 10 and a half minutes of development time on top. You don't need to rinse in the tank, so that can be done later and only takes around 10 minutes. You'll also want to take around 30 seconds to rinse and dry the tank between processing.
Your own time to process 10 rolls of film would take 67 minutes in your own time If you went entirely from start to finish with less than a 5 second gap between each step. This also assumes that you own a multi-8 tank and 10 paterson reels (which could be had for free assuming you're cheap enough). You need to purchase multiple kits to

Your bare costs are $27 plus at least 1 hour of your time (in minimum wage), so as long as you're not living in a third world shithole, your costs are already over the $30 I pay for processing, it also takes you more time than the 40 minute round trip for me and the generious twenty minutes I added on where I pay for the development, get my receipt and leave.

To process more film at once, your cost of chemistry exceeds my costs significantly. In what way is your process better financially?

>>3005927

You pay $3 a roll at a lab that will develop some smut?

Because if you want to go barebones pricing, I can get a roll done at costco for $1.50 AND get a hot dog and sodie pop while i'm there, but that's not the issue.

>>3005926
It looks like people want me to set up my own dark room, when all I really wanted was the name of a place that can be cool for, like, a second.

I'll get there one day, but I'm not there right now.

This thread is a little like

>Q. what's a good email service? Gmail wants me to give them my phone number when I sign up.
>A. Install Gentoo.

>>3005927
(cont.)
I ran out of characters to post with.

You can use more kits to have more working solution but it's never really going to give the same economy as lab processing when it's so cheap. The time and gear investing just to do the process in the same time far exceeds the lab option. I get to drop off my rolls, specify if I want them cut into strips and sleeved or left uncut and take them home in wallets for under two hours investment that I can drop off as I'm passing the lab in my daily life.
Different strokes for different folks, not everyone will be able to get the most bang for their buck or even convenience for the same money/time investment.
>>3005932
>but that's not the issue.
Exactly, while I advocate always processing your own film, it's down to what you enjoy and what works for you. If buying 3-4 1L kits off of B&H works for you, then good. It won't stop me from dropping off 10-20 rolls casually.

>>3005935
If you're taking porn pictures or out and out smut, just try different services or even go for development only at places.
I can't really help you because I don't live in America, but I can't see why a process/develop only service would be offended at seeing some 36x24 or 6x9 smut. It's a different story if you're sending them 8x10 smut.

If I was in this situation, I'd pay for process only and scan/dslr scan my own negs.

>>3005935
kek'd .. good one

>>3005935

It's more like

>Q: Can someone name a barber that will shave my balls? The guy down the street won't do it for me. >:(
>A: Do it yourself, bro.

Then you're like, NO! I'M RICH! I WANT TO PAY SOMEONE TO LOOK AT MY BALLS.

>>3005945
I can get people to shave my balls no problem. The ol' sac 'n' crack waxing is an available service in the first world.

>>3005945
Medford Waxing will take care of you, they're just outside the city.

Now where can I send my smut?

>>3005921
labcuck detected

>>3005867
The bigger the tank, the bigger the dick. Obviously.

90% of this board is an open, rotting septic tank under 40°C blazing sun.

What the FUCK is the issue with shooting photos in film or digital? Apparently a bunch of KEKS here have to holler out their 'superior' opinion whenever anyone mentions something a millimeter outside the norm.

>>3005927
Who develops for $3 a roll?

>>3005976
t. digicuck.

>>3006025
suck my virgin dick

>>3006029
>he doesnt have a manly, veiny, well used rugged dick

go away, creep.

>>3005758
What about Walgreens?

>>3005758
DO IT YOURSELF FAGGOT!


Fuck, I live in a shitty third world country I've been developing film with cafenol and Xray fixer for a year. A few months ago I didn't even have a tank I had to use the see saw method.

>>3006183
You're not really selling me on this

>>3006191

No one cares, cuckold.

You won't find a permissive photo lab because you always end up with CP.

Always.

>>3006192
brb opening a photolab.

>>3006199

Haha cuz see you are implying that you would open a risky small business centered around a dying niche just in case you would receive child pornography, which is nearly universally reviled and is thus a controversial thing for you to desire!

File: _IMG5183_pexp.jpg (406KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1200x800px

>>3006202
forsooth! you have devised my strategy, what a cunning foe!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB