Topline:
Recently we found out LAist is full of film photography loving journalists. Here are several personal recommendations from our staff on where to go around Southern California for your film developing needs.
Why it matters: Finding the right film lab for yourself is an important part in film photography, according to Harvey Film Lab founder Kacie.
Read on:...to find your film photography home.
Before digital cameras and smartphones became ubiquitous it was film photography that reigned supreme. Back in the day that meant a trip to your local film processing store to get those negatives developed. Today a convenient alternative is the local CVS Photo Lab. They can get you scans and digital prints, but they no longer return your negatives.
So if you want those originals back, and for a chance to engage with your local photography scene – here are some independent film developing shops in L.A. and O.C. hand-picked by LAist’s photography-loving staff.
Powell Camera Shop
160 West Badillo Street
Covina, CA 91723
First up our General Assignment Reporter Destiny Torres frequents this San Gabriel Valley location.
What do they develop?
They take standard 35mm and medium format 120mm film and can use both C-41 and E-6 processing.
What’ll it cost me?
It varies depending on what you want back. Just developing the negatives will run you $9.99 before taxes. If you want color digital scans as well as prints: between $15 and 20 dollars. If you prefer black and white scans in addition to prints: between $22 and $32, according to Frankie Barron, a manager of Powell.
How long does it take to develop?
Your best bet is to go in person as Powell rarely accepts mail in negatives. It should take a week to get your photos back. The store doesn’t develop photos on site but sends them to professional developers at Swan Photo Labs in San Clemente.
Samy’s Camera
1759 E. Colorado Blvd.
Pasadena, CA 91106
If you’ve ever been interested in cameras and you’ve spent some time in Pasadena chances are you’ve heard of Samy’s Camera. This recommendation comes from AirTalk producer Lucy Copp.
What do they develop?
The shop takes various film formats including 35mm, medium format 120mm. They can also develop 4 by 5 and 8 by 10 large format or sheet film.
What’ll it cost me?
35mm film will cost you $6 a roll for color, $8 a roll for black and white. For color photo scans in 35mm and 120mm the cost is around $12 for low resolution, $18 for medium resolution, and $25 for high resolution. Adding prints? For 24 photos it'll be between $9.96 and $10.83. Thirty-six photos will cost you between $13.44 and $13.73.
How long does it take to develop?
Negatives will take two to five business days. Prints and scans will take about a week to 10 days. Samy's lets you drop off negatives in store at their locations in Santa Ana, Pasadena and Fairfax. Negatives are sent to their photo lab in the Fairfax area for development, according to Pasadena employee Dana Mooradian. All 35mm and 120mm color film development is done at the Fairfax location. Black and white and large format are sent to the Icon lab in Los Angeles for development.
Analog Photomart
416 E 2nd St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Our Major Gifts Officer Malka Fenyvesi also frequents Samy’s, but recently she’s noticed a new store in Little Tokyo.
What do they develop?
The store is about a year old, owner Bryan Hong says they’re able to take color, black and white, and slide film in both 35 mm and 120mm.
What’ll it cost me?
Getting negatives developed will cost you $9. Add scans and the price goes up to $15 for low resolution, $18 for medium, and higher resolution for $23. Black and white development will cost a buck more across the board. 35mm prints will be $12 a roll. 120mm will cost the same for developing and scanning, but getting prints will only cost you $6.
How long does it take to develop?
This small neighborhood shop only accepts in store drop offs. They don’t do any business online. To get the scans to your e-mail takes 3 to 4 business days. To get negatives back it takes about a week, and up to 10 days for prints.
Berry Flash Photo Lab
11445 Jefferson Blvd.
Culver City, CA 90230
AirTalk Senior Producer Lindsey Wright is also a Samy’s regular, but lately she’s been going to a spot on the Westside.
What do they develop?
Berry Flash has you covered when it comes to 35mm and 120 mm, in either color or black and white. Negatives-only for 110mm. For 35mm you can choose between two different film processes, E-6 or C-41.
What’ll it cost me?
Standard color C-41 35mm processing will cost you $9.99. 120mm processing will be $14.99. Scans plus negatives for 35mm is $19.99 for “social friendly scans.” They also offer higher resolutions at $24.99. 120mm starts at $24.99, and $29.99 for high res. According to Berry Flash lab technician Natalia Delgado, if you want prints too just tack on an extra $10.
How long does it take to develop?
If you drop off your film at the main lab location in Culver City typical turnaround time is 2 to 3 business days for color negatives. Up to 10 days for black and white. You can also mail in your photos to Berry Flash Photo Lab. Their P.O. Box for mailing in film is:
Berry Flash Photo Lab
3019 Ocean Park Blvd., #370
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Tuttle Cameras
5467 E. Carson St.
Long Beach, CA 90808
AirTalk associate producer Manny Valladares loves to hit up this Long Beach location for both film developing and film gear.
What do they develop?
Tuttle Cameras can handle 35mm, 120mm, and 110mm film. Store associate Julian Lee says they process color, black & white, and slide for all formats as well.
What’ll it cost me?
Developing your 35mm film will cost $8.25. Adding scans will be $18.50. Tuttle offers different size files. Scans larger than 12 mb will run about ten dollars more each. Prints will cost anywhere between $12 and $18 depending on the number of exposures you want.
How long does it take to develop?
To get your negative scans back it’ll take around 1 to 2 days on weekdays and 2 to 3 days on weekends. You can drop your film off or mail it directly to the store. Tuttle partners with local developer Fromex for film processing.
Bill’s Camera
6022 Warner Ave.
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Bill's an O.C. favorite that’s been around since 1971.
What do they develop?
According to lab manager Josh Ventura, Bill's can develop all color film in 35mm, 120mm and APS formats.
What’ll it cost me?
$6.50 for 35mm negatives and $7.50 for 120mm negatives. Add scans to those and it’ll be $13.95 for 35mm and $14.90 for 120mm. Including prints will cost you anywhere between an additional $13 and $16 depending on the roll and the format.
How long does it take to develop?
Ventura says the typical turnaround time for the negatives is 24 hours. 120mm will take two days. You are also able to mail your negatives into the shop. All color film development is done on site. Black and white film is sent to a third party.
The Frida Cinema/Harvey Film Lab
305 E 4th St #100
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Sticking with Orange County for our final recommendation. Why not see a movie as you drop off your negatives? The one-person development operation Harvey Film Lab has a drop box at Orange County’s only independent art house theater.
What do they develop?
Kacie from Harvey Film Lab says they can develop 35mm and 120mm film, in both color and black & white.
What’ll it cost me?
Basic scans for 35mm will start at $14.70, which includes getting your negatives back too. If you want prints it’ll be an additional $14.99.
How long does it take to develop?
Film is developed exclusively on site and takes one to 7 business days. You can mail your film to them directly, or purchase services online then head over to the Frida Cinema for drop off. For pick-up you can go in-person or have them mailed to you.
That’s it! Go forth and take your pictures! But remember to get your film developed as soon as possible for the best looking photos.
Topline:
Landlords in Los Angeles County will soon be allowed to raise rents by more than 10% from their baseline before the January 2025 fires.
The vote: A vote by the county’s Board of Supervisors that could have extended a ban on post-fire price gouging for another month failed on Tuesday. Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Hilda Solis voted in favor, but Supervisors Kathryn Barger, Janice Hahn and Holly Mitchell abstained.
The details: As a result, the long-standing countywide prohibition on rent gouging will expire on May 29. The milestone comes about 17 months after the L.A. fires destroyed thousands of homes and plunged families into a hectic rental market.
Read more… to hear arguments for and against keeping the post-fire rent limits in place.
Landlords in Los Angeles County will soon be allowed to raise rents by more than 10% from their baseline before the January 2025 fires.
A vote by the county’s Board of Supervisors that could have extended a ban on post-fire price gouging for another month failed on Tuesday. Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Hilda Solis voted in favor, but Supervisors Kathryn Barger, Janice Hahn and Holly Mitchell abstained.
As a result, the long-standing countywide prohibition on rent gouging will expire May 29. The milestone comes more than 16 months after the L.A. County fires destroyed thousands of homes and plunged families into a hectic rental market.
In her motion to keep the rules in place through June 27, Horvath argued the ban should be preserved because about two-thirds of fire survivors are still in temporary housing.
Horvath wrote that many families “have run out of financial displacement coverage from their insurance companies, which reinforces the need to continue price gouging restrictions, to protect these homeowners from drastic price increases.”
Landlord groups have been pushing county leaders for months to end the rent gouging ban. During public comment in Tuesday’s meeting, Jesus Rojas with the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles said the rules have long outlived the post-fire emergency.
“They are wrongfully being used to harm thousands of rental housing providers throughout the entire county,” Rojas said. “This must stop, and it must stop now.”
In March, the county ended post-fire price gouging restrictions on hotels, because survey data found that few displaced families were still staying in temporary motel rooms. Horvath argued the rent-gouging ban should be continued until the Department of Consumer and Business Affairs could deliver further data on resident displacement and the rental market.
The rules have banned landlords from raising rents by more than 10% from advertised pre-fire levels. They also prohibited rents exceeding 200% of fair market value, as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, on previously unlisted properties.
Following the 2025 Palisades and Eaton Fires, prosecutors filed a handful of misdemeanor charges against landlords and real estate agents accused of violating the price gouging rules.
In the days after the fires, LAist spoke with one agent who encouraged her client to raise the rent on a Bel Air home nearly 86% from a previous 2024 listing.
The agent, Fiora Aston with Compass, said at the time, “I've never seen anything like this. People are desperate. There’s so many families without a house.”
The listing was later taken down. But tenant advocates with a group called The Rent Brigade started compiling data on other listings that appeared to violate price-gouging laws. By January 2026, they reported finding 18,360 listings featuring likely violations.
Topline:
Homelessness has decreased in Orange County, according to data released this week from the county’s point in time count conducted in January.
About the data: The numbers are down 13.5% compared to 2024, when the last point in time count took place, according to Doug Becht, director of Orange County’s Office of Care Coordination, which leads homelessness efforts. In total, 6,321 people were counted as experiencing homelessness across the county.
Key takeaways: Family homelessness went down, as did the number of veterans and people aged 18 and 24 experiencing homelessness. Southern cities in the county saw the largest drops in the number of unhoused people.
There was a small uptick in people over 65 experiencing homelessness across Orange County.
Read on... for details about the latest count.
Homelessness has decreased in Orange County, according to data released this week from the county’s point in time count conducted in January.
The numbers are down 13.5% compared to 2024, when the last point in time count took place, according to Doug Becht, director of Orange County’s Office of Care Coordination. The office leads the county's efforts to address homelessness. In total, 6,321 people were counted as living outdoors, in vehicles or in shelters across the county.
During the last count in 2024, there was a spike of around 28% in the number of unhoused people, with around 7,300 people experiencing homelessness at the time.
The latest data was shared on Monday during a press briefing.
Becht said there was a 37% decrease in veterans experiencing homelessness as well as a 20% decrease in young people aged between 18 and 24 experiencing homelessness.
The latest point in time results also show that family homelessness has decreased.
In contrast, older adults in the county are experiencing higher rates of housing challenges. The number of seniors experiencing homelessness increased 1.5% compared to the last count, Becht said.
Southern cities in the county saw the largest decrease in homelessness while the central region 15.5% reduction. Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest and Mission Viejo all saw drops in people experiencing homelessness. In north Orange County, homelessness decreased by about 7.5%.
Becht said the survey also revealed that the number of people experiencing chronic homelessness — defined as an extended period or several episodes of homelessness — is rising within the county’s shelter system but decreasing on the streets.
He attributed that “to the ongoing housing shortage” that is causing people to stay in shelters longer. Around 3,200 of the county’s total unhoused population live in shelters, according to the data.
And when people stay in shelters longer, there’s not enough beds available for those who are on the streets, he said.
Over 50% of the people surveyed said they were experiencing homelessness because of financial reasons like losing a job and the lack of affordable housing options.
The point in time count — a census mandated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to take place during the last 10 days of January — secures federal funding toward addressing homelessness. State and county officials use those funds to assess what programs and services are needed on the ground.
Point in time counts are widely viewed as undercounts by experts and don’t capture the full scope of homelessness — volunteers helping with the count can easily miss people, for example.
Becht said the count helps county staff engage with people experiencing homelessness. Once they have a person on the radar, it allows outreach teams to go back out and try to get them off the streets and into temporary housing.
Topline:
Want to buy a gun in California? Lawmakers may have you set aside four hours — and bring ammo for the range.
More details: Senate Bill 948, by Berkeley Democratic Sen. Jesse Arreguín, also would require gun owners moving to California to obtain a firearm safety certificate and register their firearms within 180 days of their arrival. Beginning in 2028, obtaining that certificate would require completing the training.
The backstory: It’s the latest effort by California Democrats to add more restrictions on firearm ownership in a state that already has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. However, it’s hardly certain the bill will become law. A similar measure died in the Legislature last year.
Read on... for more on the bill.
This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
Californians would have to take a four-hour course with live-fire training to buy a gun if a bill advancing through the Legislature gets signed into law.
Senate Bill 948, by Berkeley Democratic Sen. Jesse Arreguín, also would require gun owners moving to California to obtain a firearm safety certificate and register their firearms within 180 days of their arrival. Beginning in 2028, obtaining that certificate would require completing the training.
It’s the latest effort by California Democrats to add more restrictions on firearm ownership in a state that already has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. However, it’s hardly certain the bill will become law. A similar measure died in the Legislature last year.
This year’s proposal advanced from the Senate Appropriations Committee Thursday on a party-line vote with Republicans opposed. Committee members offered no comment on the measure and did not take any public testimony, which is typical for that committee.
But in March, when an earlier version of the bill would have required eight hours of training, Arreguín told the Senate Public Safety Committee the proposed training requirements would reduce gun violence and prevent accidental shootings.
“Firearm safety is essential in preventing firearm-related incidents, especially those involving children,” he said. “By strengthening training requirements and closing gaps in current law, SB 948 will ensure responsible gun ownership to keep Californians and communities safe.”
Rebecca Marcus, a lobbyist for the Brady Campaign, told the committee there were more than 69,000 shootings resulting in death or requiring urgent medical care in California from 2016 to 2021. Around one in three of those shootings were accidental, she said. Many involved children.
Gun rights advocates said the bill would be challenged in court if it becomes law.
Adam Wilson of Gun Owners of California called the proposed requirements “an insurmountable barrier to exercising a constitutional right.”
Clay Kimberling, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, said that’s especially true for the estimated 115,000 gun owners who move to California each year.
“Whether they move into the state on a new job, a new military assignment, or family obligations such as helping a sick or elderly family member, lawful firearm owners would now have to search out an instructor, pay for the class … and take eight hours out of their day … for simply wanting to continue to practice their constitutional right to keep and bear arms in a new state,” Kimberling said.
That original version of the bill also would have required new California arrivals to register firearms and take the course within 60 days.
Under current law, Californians are required to pass a written test and pay $25 to obtain a five-year firearm safety certificate to purchase a gun, but no formal training course is required.
Licensed hunters are required to take a mandatory hunting-safety course and aren’t required to get a certificate when buying rifles or shotguns. Also exempt are those who’ve obtained a concealed weapons permit, which is issued after 16 hours of mandatory training that includes live-fire at a gun range.
Those exemptions would still apply.
For everyone else, the proposed four hours of training would include coursework on state and federal gun laws, secure firearm storage, safe handling, the dangers of guns, use-of-force laws, how to sell firearms legally and conflict resolution. The live-fire portion of the course would need to last at least an hour.
Second Amendment groups say paying a Department of Justice-certified firearms instructor would add at least $400 to the cost of buying a firearm. Applicants also would have to pay for ammunition, gun rentals and range fees. Fees and firearms taxes already can add more than $100 to the cost of a firearm in California.
The training requirements would take effect July 1, 2028.
Until then, beginning on Jan. 1, gun owners moving to the state would be required to pass the current written test and register their firearms with the Department of Justice within 180 days.
Violating the proposed law would be a misdemeanor.
The bill now moves to the full Senate. It will then have to advance through the Assembly by this summer if Gov. Gavin Newsom is to sign it. He hasn’t taken a position on the legislation.
Last year, a bill with eight-hour training requirements died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
Topline:
More than a year after the flames tore through West Altadena, a teenager recounts the small, devastating losses of legacy landmarks, neighborhood identity and the ordinary life she left behind.
Why it matters: It has been more than a year since the Eaton Fire, but the emotions still linger for Claire. The news coverage has, in Claire’s words, “slowed down.” “No one really talks about it anymore. Everyone’s moved on. But it just felt like I was stuck. I just keep thinking about it. I should be moving on, but I still feel sad.”
Rebuilding lives: Now, Claire is in her first year at Pasadena City College. She is living with her family at her mother’s former boss’s home in Pasadena while their house is rebuilt. Claire found a job at a bowling alley after the restaurant where she worked, Fox’s, burned down. She is excited for the end of the year, when she hopes her family can move back.
Read on... for more on Claire's story more than a year after the fire.
This story first appeared on The LA Local.
As her family prepared to evacuate their West Altadena home, Claire McLaughlin picked up her favorite snow globe, a music box featuring a mother hummingbird and two babies. She considered packing it, then put it back.
“I left it because I thought, ‘My house isn’t going to burn. I’ll come home later,’” Claire told The LA Local.
Claire never saw her favorite snow globe again.
West Altadena did not receive its evacuation order until after 3 a.m., hours after other parts of Altadena and Pasadena were told to leave. Despite that, Claire urged her family to evacuate after a friend in Pasadena called to warn her to do the same.
“I felt like I was being dramatic,” Claire said, “because we got no notification.”
Eventually, Claire, her mother, father and two older siblings saw flames surrounding their neighborhood from their driveway. Without any official word, they knew it was time to go. Their house burned down a few hours later.
Of the 19 people who died in the Eaton Fire, 18 were in West Altadena, and two of them were Claire’s neighbors: Anthony Mitchell and his son, who needed help evacuating. “I wish people knew that,” Claire said. “No one came to help the west side of Altadena.”
More than 1,000 students in the Pasadena Unified School District lost their homes, and more than 10,000 were ordered to evacuate during the Eaton Fire. Claire was one of those students. At Pasadena High School, however, she said she didn’t know any friends who lost homes.
“Even though it happened to thousands of people, I felt alone because I was the only kid I knew,” she said.
The fire coincided with major milestones for Claire: prom, graduation and the start of college. “Before the fire, it felt like I was still a kid, growing up,” Claire said. “But then it just sped it up, and it was like, ‘Oh, I’m an adult. I need to do this.’”
At graduation, Claire was so happy that, for a moment, she forgot about the fire. “I realized I wasn’t thinking about it,” Claire said. “It felt strange. I felt like I should be thinking about it.” Looking back, she wishes her school had focused more on the fire during the ceremony.
Now, Claire is in her first year at Pasadena City College. She is living with her family at her mother’s former boss’s home in Pasadena while their house is rebuilt. Claire found a job at a bowling alley after the restaurant where she worked, Fox’s, burned down. She is excited for the end of the year, when she hopes her family can move back.
It has been more than a year since the Eaton Fire, but the emotions still linger for Claire. The news coverage has, in Claire’s words, “slowed down.”
“No one really talks about it anymore. Everyone’s moved on. But it just felt like I was stuck. I just keep thinking about it. I should be moving on, but I still feel sad.”
Claire still thinks about her neighbors, her street, her home and her musical snow globe, which she has tried and failed to find on eBay.
She misses her kitchen, her room and the sycamore tree in her front yard, which survived the fire but was later cut down for construction. Claire loved that tree. It’s where she would sit while her boyfriend washed her parents’ car. Her mother and brother would lie under the tree, usually after mountain biking in the San Gabriel Mountains behind their home, with their bikes strewn across the lawn. Claire would join them in the shade.
The tree is gone, but Claire’s house is starting to look as it once did. The last time Claire visited the site, the layout felt familiar. She could see the outline of her room in the same place and size as before.
Nearly all her neighbors are hoping to return. But Claire is worried about investment firms buying lots from families who have lived there for generations and cannot afford to come back. She has attended protests with her mother to raise awareness about West Altadena.
“When I think of the situation with West Altadena, I feel really disappointed and angry,” Claire said. “But when I think of my house, I feel hopeful. Because now I’m going home soon.”
Above all else, Claire is grateful to be able to return. As she said, “You don’t find this sense of community everywhere.”
Right before the fire, on New Year’s Day, while the Rose Bowl was on, Claire’s neighbor was outside with his kid.
“I was messing with him,” Claire said. “The little kid was trying to chase me down the street, and I was running with him, and I thought to myself, ‘I’m so lucky to grow up here.’”
For Claire, nothing can change that feeling.
“I love that place with all my heart,” she said. “I still do.”
