It is always troublesome to have films processed. Here are some of my brief experience with each lab I've dealt with, and my ratings of their qualities of the job.
But, a friend of mine sent 4 rolls over and got only 2 rolls back. Call the lab and was told all had been sent out the same day. Given this experience, whenever I had a roll out there for over a week, I become very anxious, because too many things could go wrong.
My rating: 9.9 out of 10 for E-6 processing. The 0.1 point is deducted for using cardboard mount instead of plastic.
I used it through Osco. The personnel at Osco, except the manager, are not knowledgeable, but their policy is to have all film orders entered into a computer to keep track of. This gives me a peace of mind. (Qualex part of handling does the same.) My films weren't back on the due date (3 days guaranteed by Qualex), they said they should be free to me. On the other end of the spectrum, the service at BJ's Wholesale Club has consistently been the worst. But this is another story.
On the quality side of the job, my conclusion: AVOID! All my 3 rolls were badly scratched for the first few frames. One slide probably had been dropped to the floor and someone stepped (and skid) on it!!! And the plastic mount does not provide sufficient constraining on the slide. Also, their imprinting of numbers is barely readable, and for every roll, they randomly skip a few, thus actually messes up all the numbers. I got neither price nor the quality benefit. I'll never use Qualex for E-6 again.
My rating: 4.5 out of 10 for E-6 processing; 6.5 for making prints from negatives; and 9.9 for Kodak Premium Processing doing Kodachrome slides.
Ever since the introduction of APS, Kodak has been making a mess of its processing labs. It owns both Qualex and Kodulux. The first thing Kodaks does is to snap the name of Kodulux, and then let both Kodulux and Qualex chains offer "Premium Processing" using the same logo. Truth be told, only the Kodak Processing Lab offers true "premium processing" as we know of. In Boston area, here is the key if you are trying to distinguish them: Kodulux's counter should have on display the logo of Kodak's Royal paper.
For prints, the quality is very good in average. However on one occassion that I want to have several badly made prints (made from home-made inderneg from slides) re-do, only to fiund that they refused me, with a note explaining that what I had had was the best they could because the negatives were poorly exposed. Yeah, right... :-( I regularly use the lab for "Type R" machine prints, and have been very happy with it except that it takes over a week to get the prints back, since the job has be to sent to Maryland. For slides, I haven't used because the price is unattractive.
My rating: 7 out of 10 for prints and machine enlargements from negatives, 8 out of 10 for "type R" prints from slides.
My rating: 7.5 out of 10 for E-6 processing.
This used to be my regular lab, for its irresistible price: $2.99 for 24 exposure and $3.99 for 36 exposure. My experience with them is OK to good. Turn-around time is short: I usually can get the slides back "the second day", and the processing quality is quite consistently good. I had seen occasional scratches. Slide mounting is consistently off center, and they have no way of numbering the slides. (I once requested the slides to be numbered, they had to send the order to a Kodak lab to do it!) Fortunately they use plastic reusable mounts with which I can correct the mounting manually, albeit tedious. For the price I paid and the consistent work (both good and bad) they turn out, I am very happy.
Later, around the New Year of 1998, to my delight, this lab became a Fuji Lab! Scratches were significantly reduced, slides were numbered, but they started using cardboard mounts, and the turn-around time was a bit longer: 3 business days. I guess I gained something while loosing something. I wished I could say that "I am happy thereafter...." But I had to have my fingers crossed...
It didn't help. Just a couple months later, the prices were doubled, but they didn't change the price information in the store. I argued with the store clerk and manager (of MIT's Student Center branch). They got pissed, I got angry --- the end of a honey moon. Wow. I miss the good ol' days.
My rating: 7 out of 10 before, 8.5 out of 10 now, for E-6 processing. But, I would never use it again. Their price now is $7.99 and turn-around 10 days. For 1 penny more, I can get a pro lab to do it within 3 hours. No way unless they beg me hard.
When the CS Photo turn into Fuji Lab, I already sensed that the good days will end sooner or later. One day when picking up some grocery at MIT's Student Center, I glanced the Star Market's price list for E-6 processing: $3.99 for 36 exposure and $2.89 for 24. When the relation with the Fuji Lab turned sour, I dropped 2 rolls into Star Market to test the water. I am very delighted. It uses plastic mounts, and the job is clean, neat, and no scratches. The only short coming is that the slide mounts are mot the reusable type. The slide is adhered to the mount, and I am not sure about the archival quality of the glue. (But I believe the cardboard mounts also use some kind of adhesive to hold the slide in place).
My rating: 8.5 out of 10 for E-6 processing; 6 out of 10 for prints from negatives.
It is price is quite reasonable if you use its "40% off" coupons which can be readily found when you don't need them. They use Kodak chemicals on Fuji papers in Agfa machines. So for any of these brands, you find something homy. ;-) When you are desperate for getting a set of prints, this is a good place to turn to, although they almost never get the job done on time. The good thing about this place is that the printing is done on the premises so it is easier to ask for re-dos if you have the guts, and there is one or two people per store who know a little bit about what they are doing. For slides? They farm out, $8 for a week turn-around. Never mind!
My rating: 7 out of 10 for prints from negatives (slightly higher than it deserves because you can ask for re-dos).