AG Processing

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jao
  • Start date Start date
Jao

Jao

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,936
Name
Adrian
Edit My Images
Yes
I have used AG to process my colour MF and always been very pleased with the results, even when the lab time took a little while. They have really picked up the pace on straight C41 dev only now though. I posted three rolls of 120 to them on Tuesday morning from my local post box in rural (middle of nowhere) Norfolk, the processed negs landed back through the door this morning. Very fast turnaround indeed. Delighted with the service.
 
Well that's better than the quality of their film scanning, then.

Or their attentiveness to emails.
 
What's up with there film scanning?
I was just about to post a roll off for processing and scanning
 
I mainly use them for dev only, always been pleased with results. 12 months ago they scanned some 35mm for me and I was happy with the results.
 
allicio said:
What's up with there film scanning?
I was just about to post a roll off for processing and scanning
Click to expand...

I've used them a lot for process and scan. Always been pleased with the result. Not the quickest, but good value.
 
droj said:
Well that's better than the quality of their film scanning, then.

Or their attentiveness to emails.
Click to expand...

They certainly used to have a responsiveness/customer care problem, but we've heard there have been big improvements there. Never heard anything against their scanning before. What was the problem?
 
droj said:
Well that's better than the quality of their film scanning, then.

Or their attentiveness to emails.
Click to expand...

Can you expand on this please, for the benefit of everyone else?

I have run a search on your email through our outlook (I pretty certain I know who you are) - I can find no evidence of any email being ignored or answered anything other than swiftly. Furthermore I can find no evidence of any feedback on the scanning we did for the 1 roll of film you sent us (unless, of course, you have been ordering under an alias)

We answer all emails and clear down in-boxes throughout the day, but if you can let me have some detail I am sure we can get to the bottom of the issue.

For the record, we do not have any complaints on file as to the quality of film scanning.

ChrisR said:
Never heard anything against their scanning before. What was the problem?
Click to expand...

That's because there isn't anything wrong with it at all, it's extremely high quality and very competitively priced.

We are scanning for some very discerning and particular customers and we treat all customers work with the same level of care. All images are balanced by people here who put a great deal of pride into their work, and who have an enormous amount of experience. Furthermore, in terms of scanning, with the Noritsu HS1800 and Flextight X5, we have invested in the best possible equipment that is also the most efficient so we can offer a lot more for a competitive price point.

Back in 2012 -13 when we first took over the Metro Colour Lab business, turnaround was a lot slower, but today we offer some of the fastest turnaround in this industry. It's normal for C41 dev only to be dispatched back on the day it is received. And B&W is also normally dispatched back in around 48 hours. E6 is around 7 days, purely because there is less volume. If we are scanning or printing turnaround is anything from day of receipt to 3 days, unless it is a very large job. We continue to pick up customers on the basis of quality.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I often get scanned images back that are out of focus so any chance of that issue being sorted? Can't be user error surely??

Seriously though, been very happy with ag. Not done any for a few months but speed is fine as never in a mad rush and on the rare occasions my shots are exposed properly and in focus, they look great. Nice and easy ordering process. Good value and definitely recommended.
 
So, I sent off two 120 TriX films to AG Photolab on 17 March for process and scan, via their freepost label. Ordered on the web prior. Got an email the next day that they had received it:

RECEIVED. NOW IN LAB.

We aim to turn around orders as fast as possible, depending on our workload and the complexity of your order. Most important to us is to maintain the very best quality in processing, scanning and printing.

IMPORTANT - If you need your work returned for a deadline please let us know.

Current estimated turnaround times:
Develop only C41 & B&W - normally within 24 hours of receipt.
Develop only E6 - normally within 3-5 days of receipt.
C41 & B&W with scans or prints - normally within 5-6 days of receipt.
E6 with scans or prints - normally 7-8 days.
E6 mounted AND prints or scans 8-14 days.
Prints only from File or Neg - Normally within 24 hours of receipt.
Click to expand...

Note this was a Friday, so presumably an extra 2 days might figure. On Tuesday 22nd an email told me the order was despatched, and it arrived the next day, 6 days after posting.

The negatives are in clear sleeves, no filing holes, so I had to fold their sleeves and put them in another sleeve to file them. I haven't had enough 120 to know what the best sleeving solution for 6*6 is yet.

I ordered the medium scans (small scans only saved £1 each). The files seem to be a maximum of 2079*2048 pixels (4.3 mp). That would be 924 ppi if the larger pixel count were the full 2.25 inches. (The order confirmation says medium scan ~18MB, which would translate to a 6 mp image, or about 2500pixels square). To my mind that's the minimum I'd want for flexible use, and on that basis it felt quite expensive at £20.86 for two. However, taking outwards postage into account it was the cheapest of those I have in the nifty price estimator. The scans look fine.

Quick comparison... UKFL's small size for 645 is: 2433 x 3342 pixels (8″x10″ when printed). Peak Imaging indicates their small size is suitable for 5*5" prints, presumably 1500*1500 pixels, while the medium size (CD Archive 120 Gold) is suitable for 10*10" prints, presumably 3000*3000 pixels. Photo Hippo (fairly similar price to AG) say their medium scan is 4547*3047 pixels, presumably for 645 negatives (it's not quite clear). Club 35 say: Standard Resolution CD [small] (1536x1024), Super Resolution CD [medium] (3072x2048), again presumably 645.

Against these comparison, I feel that AG's medium scan is on the small size, and on this basis I would probably not use them again. Everything else was fine, though. Communications definitely a step up from pearlier experiences,
 
ChrisR said:
So, I sent off two 120 TriX films to AG Photolab on 17 March for process and scan, via their freepost label. Ordered on the web prior. Got an email the next day that they had received it:



Note this was a Friday, so presumably an extra 2 days might figure. On Tuesday 22nd an email told me the order was despatched, and it arrived the next day, 6 days after posting.

The negatives are in clear sleeves, no filing holes, so I had to fold their sleeves and put them in another sleeve to file them. I haven't had enough 120 to know what the best sleeving solution for 6*6 is yet.

I ordered the medium scans (small scans only saved £1 each). The files seem to be a maximum of 2079*2048 pixels (4.3 mp). That would be 924 ppi if the larger pixel count were the full 2.25 inches. (The order confirmation says medium scan ~18MB, which would translate to a 6 mp image, or about 2500pixels square). To my mind that's the minimum I'd want for flexible use, and on that basis it felt quite expensive at £20.86 for two. However, taking outwards postage into account it was the cheapest of those I have in the nifty price estimator. The scans look fine.

Quick comparison... UKFL's small size for 645 is: 2433 x 3342 pixels (8″x10″ when printed). Peak Imaging indicates their small size is suitable for 5*5" prints, presumably 1500*1500 pixels, while the medium size (CD Archive 120 Gold) is suitable for 10*10" prints, presumably 3000*3000 pixels. Photo Hippo (fairly similar price to AG) say their medium scan is 4547*3047 pixels, presumably for 645 negatives (it's not quite clear). Club 35 say: Standard Resolution CD [small] (1536x1024), Super Resolution CD [medium] (3072x2048), again presumably 645.

Against these comparison, I feel that AG's medium scan is on the small size, and on this basis I would probably not use them again. Everything else was fine, though. Communications definitely a step up from pearlier experiences,
Click to expand...
Good feedback Chris, for me as one of their most critical customers in the past it's great to hear they're improving their processing service and communication. It may worth asking if they can't improve the quality of their standard scans as it would be a shame if they don't get the custom for the sake of a few pixels at a reasonable price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top