Almost placed a film order

<p>Last night I was about to place a film order for because I am down to only about 5 rolls of 35mm E6.<br>

I had 40 rolls of velvia and 20 rolls of provia 400x in my cart and was about to proceed to checkout but I hesitated.<br>

The total was nearly $800.<br>

Every 3 or 4 years I buy a dSLR but I always end up selling them because they sit around gathering dust.<br>

I shoot film because I love it, but the rising costs and uncertainty about E6 processing in the future has me reading specs on digital cameras again.<br>

I don't like to limit myself. I can't help but think before I press the shutter button that pushing this button is going to cost me roughly 60 cents.<br>

I'm finding that I won't expose as many frames for one subject as I used to in the past.<br>

Is anyone else struggling with this?</p>

<p>I'm in the same boat, and there's probably a lot of film users in the same situation. </p>

<p>I still use film for my own reasons and it works for me, but I wouldn't recommend it to any young guy starting out, if only for economic reasons. A digital camera is in my future, probably one of the next incarnations of the Sony NEX, but I'll keep using film for certain applications.</p>

<p>Nick,</p>

<p>I think you just have to bite the bullet. You love to shoot film. That is the key. </p>

<p>E6 processing for most of us is going to be by mail order. Can you accept that?</p>

<p>How long does it take you to shoot those 60 rolls? Being selective in shooting isn't necessarily a bad thing. Have you thought of a hybrid film/digital shooting style? Shoot E6 when you want slides and are willing to shoot at a slower pace. Shoot digital when you don't want to limit the number of shots.</p>

<p>I shot mostly slides for over 40 years. Even 10 years ago the price wasn't that bad for E6 film and developing was easy to find. Now that I am retired it reminds me of my high school days. I could only afford to shoot 1 roll of Kodachrome per month. Every shot had to be a keeper. It can limit your enjoyment of photography.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I also get my processing done through the mail because the only local option has bad handling practices, scratched film, dust, and finger prints on every frame.<br>

40 rolls will probably last me 2 years unless I take any special trips.<br>

I tried carrying film and digital SLR's together but nearly always preferred the images made on film.<br>

One of the other factors that always pushes me to try digital again is the fact that I have to scan my images if I want to share them or have a print made. Scanning is an art that I never mastered.</p>

<p>Why not print film instead? It's much cheaper than slides and much more convenient.</p>

<p>If you're comparing to digital then the obvious benefit of being able to project transparencies is lost in the comparison.</p>

<p>Certainly one could electronically project scans of color negatives just the same as digital files.</p>

 

<p>E-6 is disproving the idea of film's "long tail." It shows just how far demand has fallen in terms of its impact on selection, price, and processing availability. I gave up on 35mm slide years ago and shoot the stale stuff I have for x-pro work. I'm gradually shooting up my 120 Kodak and Fuji E-6 but won't be buying any more after that pile is gone. I'm not hurting for quality local processing but it--along with scanning--would be painful if I was buying at current prices. This new reality sucks but unless you're willing to shift into survivalist mode with home scanning and processing, slide shooting will be expensive.</p>

<p>From a purely economic point of view, film makes sense if you only shoot a few rolls a year, or maybe shoot B&W and do your own developing and printing: if you already own film gear and you're only spending maybe $100 a year on film, it might take five years or more for a DSLR to pay for itself. But once you hit the point of spending $800 on film, not to mention developing, you've paid for a decent DSLR. Of course there are other expenses involved with digital and the whole question of which you prefer.</p>

<p>When I send out, I use <strong><a href="http://www.thedarkroom.com">thedarkroom.com</a></strong> and for $15 get developing and scans on a CD returned to me, comes to 42 cents an image. That may or may not be "cheap" but it works out to about 66 rolls of film equals one $1000 DSLR. If you plan to shoot more rolls than that, you'll probably be better off with a DSLR. </p>

<p>Is ten rolls of film, per year, enough to capture what you want to capture? For many of us, and certainly pre-digital, the answer was yes. That's 360 images, nearly one per day. Some days you shoot more, some days none at all. Now you could, with a DSLR, shoot everything. Lots of folks do that. There are supposedly 1 billion digital pictures made every day. 990 million of those are of the photographer's foot, his cat, or the box the camera came in. </p>

<p>:)</p>

<p>I go through this myself every time I order film (mostly Velvia 50) these days. I've also been using a DSLR and Lightroom more this year for my work (agricultural research), which has made me more appreciative of all the capabilities of digital. But even though a well-done digital image looks great on the monitor and makes a fantastic print, there's nothing to look forward to in the mail, nothing to look at on the lightbox, and no feeling of satisfaction that comes from getting a fine image straight out of the camera. So I've stuck with film for my personal work. I figure that soon enough it won't even be an option, so as long as costs are merely unpleasant and not truly prohibitive, and material is available, I might as well shoot it.</p>

<p>Knowing the current cost of each image has made me more selective and less likely to bracket straightforward exposures 'just to be sure,' though.</p>

<p>Although I don't have to, I use the same approach in digital as I did utilizing film. If the shutter is worth pressing....it makes sense whether it's film or digital. Case in point....few weeks ago I was in Denali and took some shots of a griz (+ other animals). I walked away with dozen shots and 10 were keepers. Majority of 'togs would empty entire memory card on one animal > spray and pray.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p>I am noticing more and more photographers out at the parks using the "spray and pray" tactic, sometimes even on static subjects. <br>

Last year, one of them asked me if my camera (F4s) was broken because it made a weird sound after the shutter click. I had to explain to him that it was the sound of the film being advanced in the camera.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This is even more of an issue when shooting medium format film. E-6 processing has also become expensive. I was recently at a large camera store and wanted to buy, among other things, some 36 exp. rolls of Fuji Supera XTra. There was Pro 400H and Porta 400 in 36 exp. rolls but for more than twice the price. The more expensive film, especially the Portra, has finer grain. This may or may not be important and depends partly on what size enlargement might be made. If I know I will need a large print I will just use a larger format. At this point I don't know whether anyone will process a 250 exp. roll from an old motor drive film camera. Was there even a 250 exp. back made for the Nikon F6? A 120 roll of Ektar 100 is just over $5. Even at the slow rate the Bronica SQ-AM fires, the whole roll is quickly gone and you get a grand total of 12 frames. If 120 color film availability trails off I hope to still use the cameras for b&w. </p>

<p>That isn't what I want to hear. I have a good supply of 120 in my freezer but I haven't paid attention to current processing costs.</p>

Process at home. Cheap, fast, easy, fun.

<p>Photography is expensive. My preference is an image that provides the look that film presents.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I can't help but think before I press the shutter button that pushing this button is going to cost me roughly 60 cents.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If you bought yourself a good full frame DSLR and used it for 3 or 4 years you may find that each shot would also cost you around 60 cents depending on how many shots you take (depreciation). People tend to take more photos when shooting digitally but the key to working out the economics is to compare how many FINISHED photographs you end up with compared to what you got when shooting film. </p>

<p>Film is not that much more expensive unless you shoot loads of it. With digital you also have the problem of archivability which still has not been solved from a consumer point of view. You need to budget for big hard disks and a good backup system.</p>

<p>To make it cheaper I would highly recommend shooting C41. It's cheaper, scans much easier and has far superior exposure latitude. Also, with the likes of Ektar and Portra, the quality is at least on par with the best E6 can offer (if not better). If you have the time, develop the negatives at home. It's cheap and good fun too. </p>

 

<p>When one has used only film for slides for over 50 years the actual physical cost of continuing makes one pause and think.<br>

The only slide film I'll use is Provia, and have recently purchased what may well be my last rolls of 400X; from B&H as all three of my local dealers were not interested in ordering only 20 rolls of 36 exposure Provia 400X-36<br>

Minimum order with Fuji here in Canada is 100 rolls or so I am told. Don't know if that is all forms of Fuji film or just a particular roll designation.<br>

The roughly $10.00 price per roll after shipping, duty and taxes courtesy of Revenue Canada made it up $15.00/roll. After taking 36 exposures which usually takes me about two months (my photography enjoyment these days is next to zilch) then it's off to the local Black's Cameras now owned by Bell Canada. The dimwit behind the counter knows those little chips go for processing, but what is slide film, and is it different rom colour film?<br>

Having had rolls of slide film processed in C-41 because some idiot did not read or was unable to comprehend the instructions marked in large letters <strong> slide film process E-6</strong> only, am wary.<br>

Two or more weeks later I go to collect the box of slides. The processing charge has gone up, from C$13.99 before tax of 13 percent to now C$21.00/roll plus 13 percent tax of $2.73)<br>

The new grand total is C$15.oo+ C$21.00 + C$2.73 = C$38.73!<br>

Works out to C$1.87/slide give or take.<br>

iOne point one my end. I have lost interest not because of the demise of film.<br>

The paranoia that surrounds taking photogrohs of anything public means railways which I used to photograph are now consider illegal, vessels on the lakes can't be photographed, somebody somewhere will object and I am far too old and too much of a curmudgeon to change. <br>

Besides i like the feel of my F100 as a device, although if it died tomorrow I would stop doing any fancy SLR photography land use only my small film based Olympus Pen camera, and it would then take a year to use a roll of film!<br>

My few remaining older friends not ensconsed in a nursing home or not planted underground still use film. They have not a computer or a cell phone or another else similar. Many are older than my 67 years and they'll keep shooting slides until they can no more.<br>

Maybe that's the idea; for me digital doesn't existence as hard copy; then again suspect the world around us really doesn't give a damn either.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Bryce, you might look into the processing service Fujifilm Canada is quietly offering through Loblaws stores that have photo studios and Kodak printing machines. Film--both C-41 and I think E-6--are sent direct to Fuji in Mississauga. Processing is 7-10 days. Worth asking about.</p>

<p>Here is how I have come to terms with this question:<br>

-Buy 4 rolls of 24-exp Fuji at Walmart for $7.<br>

- Wait until you shoot all 4 then send to The Darkroom in their prepaid mailer.<br>

- Develop and scan for $10 each ~$40<br>

- Return postage $5.<br>

TOTAL.....$52<br>

That's 54 cents a print. For the enjoyment of it that is well worth it. The downside is that it takes a while before I shoot 4 rolls if I am not traveling. BTW, they do E6 processing for $3 a roll. Is that a lot?</p>

Did the same thing the other day when I loaded my cart at freestyle with 120 and

4x5. Prices are out there because of lack of competition, for one. But I looked

through a few books of big negatives and realized my appreciation for have the

image in non digital form.

<p>Similar boat here.</p>

<p>With digital, I don't use it for 3 or 4yrs, that's still far too expensive. $2,000US? My last dSLR was from 2004, just got myself a newer full frame 3 months ago. Intend to keep for 10yrs.</p>

<p>With film, again I don't shoot much that is the way I afford it. Heck here it is a lot more expensive, $17US for develop and probably $5US for mounting. So I just import from the USA and export for development provided I ship 10 rolls so it max the postal with Dwaynes. Slide film here is about $35US a pop for 35mm. Maybe $12US for BW or C41.</p>

<p>B/W is cheaper but still you still have to pay per the roll but developing is cheaper if you DIY. Unless it is a planned drive out I won't use film.</p>

I don't care how much film costs, I am not using digital anymore. I shoot very little color these days because there are

only a few places that will make a real print using optical means. But I do use it and won't mind the cost of using my my

120 and 4x5 Velvia 50 I just bought, the latter will be about $10 a sheet total cost to shoot and process.

 

I'll just take my time shooting it, maybe even develop it my self in my Jobo in a few years if too many processing options dry up. Black and white is another story, I have tens of thousands invested in that and it is the main reason I get to forget digital even exists.

<p>I can't tell the so-called "look of film". I can post dozens of pictures here and doubt anyone could tell what is film and what is digital. For me it boils down to the pleasure of working with various film cameras I have. The way they handle, function and feel is a big part of photography. The satisfaction of getting a superb photo from a $30 camera is another factor. </p>

<p>I am staggered by some of the prices you people are quoting for film processing. I would have thought it would have been dirt cheap in the USA. Perhaps you should consider sending batches to the UK for processing. It costs £2.75 ($4.20) per roll of C41 or E6 (35mm, 120 and 5x4")<br>

http://www.photos2you.co.uk</p>

<p>You have not factored in the cost of shipping tothe uK and return.<br>

Postage is now stupid expensive and here in Canada alls uch goods are subject to federal and provincial taxes.<br>

On home ground it may be cheaper, for you but in the long run back and forth,<br>

it is not.</p>