digital vs. film prints prices

On 15 Apr 2005 08:18:55 -0700, "Mr.Bolshoy Huy"
<bolshoyhuy RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

 >what would be cheaper:
 >A) 4 rolls of film printed at a lab.
 >or
 >B) lab printing 100 photos from the card?
 >all 4x6
 >(just the cost of the prints. yes, I know the card is re-used and I
 >have to buy 4 more rolls of film)

Well, 4 rolls of film @ 36 shots per film = 140 shots

I can get a 36 shot film developed and printed for £2.99 (GBP) a film
in 24 hours, so that's £11.96 for 4 films.

Quality not brilliant but not bad either. If I don't mind waiting a
week or so I can get better quality prints from another company on
their 7 day service for about the same price.

11.96 for 140 prints = 8.5p a print approximately.

Standard price for prints from a card if I do it online at a cheap
place is about 10p a print, so:

10.00 for 100 prints

From a high-street print shop it's more expensive.

So, 4 x 36 shot films will be CHEAPER per print than the equivalent
digital.

Of course the benefit of digital is supposed to be that you don't need
to print all your shots, just the ones you like and it's unlikely that
every shot on a 36 roll film is going to be a 'keeper'.

However, film really isn't that expensive if you are just wanting
shots developed e.g. family shots etc and aren't concerned about
paying for large prints or for high quality printing.

Matt

P.S. I can get 24 shot rolls of film processed and printed for £1 a
roll. So if we were doing THAT comparison i.e. 4 x 24 shots on film
with a 100 shot digital card then the film would be even cheaper.

However my experience of this super cheap service is not great so I'm
not using those figures.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: digital vs. film prints prices 

On 15 Apr 2005 08:18:55 -0700, "Mr.Bolshoy Huy"
<bolshoyhuy DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

 >what would be cheaper:
 >A) 4 rolls of film printed at a lab.
 >or
 >B) lab printing 100 photos from the card?
 >all 4x6
 >(just the cost of the prints. yes, I know the card is re-used and I
 >have to buy 4 more rolls of film)

Are you comparing 24s or 36s to the 100 digitals?, 24 would be closer.

Either way, processing + printing only, the film route will probably
be cheaper, more so if using 24's.

Once you add in:

* The cost of buying the film,
* Realize that out of 100 frames of both film and digital, the same
percentage (relatively low) are keepers, but with digital you'd
obviously only print the keepers
* You get darkroom control on the digitals

.... the balance shifts.

Of course, you need to own, or have access to, or purchase a
relatively expensive dSLR and a reasonable PC to do my slightly
extended comparison.

--
Owamanga!
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.pbase.com/owamanga" target="_blank">http://www.pbase.com/owamanga</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: digital vs. film prints prices 

Mr.Bolshoy Huy wrote:
 > what would be cheaper:
 > A) 4 rolls of film printed at a lab.
 > or
 > B) lab printing 100 photos from the card?
 > all 4x6
 > (just the cost of the prints. yes, I know the card is re-used and I
 > have to buy 4 more rolls of film)
 >
In Montreal (All prices in CAD)
probably between 10$ and 15$ to process a roll (24) with one set of 4x6
prints at a specialized store
So, 40$ to 60$ for 100 prints.

I usually pay 35$ for 100 digital 4x6 prints, once again at a
specialized store.

Of course, you can get both cheapper at Walmart or a drug store.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: digital vs. film prints prices