If film doesn't become cheap then nothing else will matter and it will die

[James G. Dainis]

Any losses in quality are overlooked for convenience by most people. Digital is replacing 35mm film much as 35mm cameras replaced 4x5 Speed Graphics.

[bebu_lamar]

<p>Film may live or it may die I don't know but I know for sure that it will be more and more expensive and not cheaper.</p>

[psul_aul]

<p>Film is pretty cheap right now. I can buy a 3 roll pack of kodak gold 200 for 5.99 at Target. That is two dollars a roll. Costco in my area still process C41 for $3.99 a 24 exp roll with 4x6 prints. A CD is another three dollars. Basically I can buy and process a roll of 24 exposure film for 6 bucks + tax. That is the cheapest its ever been in my life time. I remember in the early 1980s before the advent of one hour mini labs, paying close to $8 for a roll of film to be prossessed. And the roll of film itself cost over two dollars back then. <br /> If one adjusts for inflation, the aproximately ten dollars it cost to buy a roll of film and process it in the early 1980s would be about $25 today. Film is as cheap, if not cheaper now, than its ever been. What will keep the price down is keeping the demand up. We need to shoot and process lots of film so the manufacturers keep making it.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>I don't think it's just the money factor. Most of us can afford a couple of cans of Tri-x, or Kodak gold a month. The main factor for the demise of film is the convenience that digital provides.<br>

<br />When it comes to Digital it's instant gratification well almost, you still might have to run it past some editing software, but it sure beats waiting at the 1 hour lab.<br>

<br />I still love film and if they keep selling it, I will keep buying it. The way digital cameras have improved since the first 5D and keep improving makes them hard to beat however. Bringing the price of film down might keep it floating a little longer but for how long ?</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<p>Fuji Acros is $3.19 a roll. A bit of a shame. It used to be under $3 last year. Anyway shooting it and developing it at home is $4. I don't think $1.50 for a roll of something that contains silver at todays exchange rates is realistic. I was happy with <$3.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>If one adjusts for inflation, the aproximately ten dollars it cost to buy a roll of film and process it in the early 1980s would be about $25 today. Film is as cheap, if not cheaper now, than its ever been. What will keep the price down is keeping the demand up. We need to shoot and process lots of film so the manufacturers keep making it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>All that sounds reasonable to me. I just wish Portra and Velvia 50 were cheaper.</p>

[craig_sander]

<p>The problem is, it takes money to find a way to make things cheaper. In order to get that money, its gonna take a price increase on something that the market is shrinking for.<br>

I do wish film was cheaper. I don't care what they're paying in other countries. Here in the U.S. its high and I can see the reason why some people are struggling with the hobby.<br>

There is no harm in discussing this. You aren't taking away from valuable film shooting time with this thread.</p>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>Well, I know it is going up...a lot in the next 5 years, so I am prepared for "Filmageddon"...</p>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>My wife does not mind...</p><div></div>

[d_f11]

<p>The 'Global Economy' is the reason for films' demise, or, more specifically, the 'Tech Giants' with all their power & pull. They want a world that's COMPLETELY digital. Kodak's no longer calling their own shots, 'course, when's the last time they (or Fuji) did? I e-mailed Ilford a couple of times telling them my concerns, being a film shooter myself, and - NO RESPONSE! Are they really the last bastian standing? Will they drop a bomb on us B&W shooters with that increasingly familiar headline "...and, due to declining sales...therefore we will discontinue..." </p>

[RaymondC]

<p>I live in NZ as well so I import frilm from Freesyle (CA, USA) even thou they might be more $$ than B&H but they charge $10'ish for postal while B&H charges $45-50US min. Unless if I was purchasing 20 rolls of slide film.... I then send back to the USA for processing.</p>

<p>For me, I shoot mostly digital at home unless I have visioned an image I want to create here or else I use film travelling around here or overseas. I shoot maybe 12 frames a day on average.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>I think for my peers; digital is intant, no film cost and they can now shoot much more, how about 500 frames for an weekend outing. The rear LCD to double check composition and metering. It's instant, posting on Facebook, fuller control right to the editing and print stage. To them, self printing is not cheap but they enjoy it. And a lot easier for them than the darkroom. For those that used print film, the quality is better than it. More so with non photographers, now with digital out of the camera it's better than C41 prints from the local pharmacy or high street discount chain like Kmart, and I guess Walmart for those in the USA. Non photographers (mine) never went to the pro labs cos they were too expensive.</p>

<p>IMO for us here, NZ, even if you discount the film and lab cost by 75% they still won't use it. Or even free for that matter. I guess you may have some hobbyists who will but not by in large. They are just happy to capture images off their iPhones, and digicams. My mum for example, would like a swivel out LCD just so the pple in the photo can see how they look before the photo is taken. Average Joe and Jane don't want pro pictures, they just want something to record a moment. If they wanted pro pictures, they would hire a pro. All they do is; everything get together say cheese and the photo is taken. This was outside the Eiffel Tower or this was family's birthday at the restaurant, or some backyard BBQ, the kid with the soccer ball etc. </p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<blockquote>

<p>All that sounds reasonable to me. I just wish Portra and Velvia 50 were cheaper.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bingo, except for me it's Kodak 5203 and 5219 (movie stocks). I have never shot them but they are superior to any Portra variant and Ektar. Yet the only place I know that sells 5219 (500T) charges $150 for five rolls. That includes scanning and processing, which is awesome, but that's $30 a roll!<br>

<br />B&W of course can be dirt cheap, even T-Max 400 (which is as fast as you need as it has more latitude than even 5219).</p>

<p>What film needs is a revolution. Or a miracle.<br>

<br />BTW Daniel: HOLY S***.</p>

[rossb]

<blockquote>

<p>I always suggested on someone making a hybrid <a id="itxthook0" href="../film-and-processing-forum/00aj4v?start=20" rel="nofollow">camera</a> that shoots film and digital to keep everyone happy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I guess I would not buy a camera like that myself. My hobby is 35mm and I prefer the old school mechanical camera's. I enjoy fiddling around with the exposure and focus before I shoot. And of course film produces a very pleasing photo. </p>

[patrick_mont]

<p>I am not saying that I agree by replying but I would like to add in that along with "cheap film" such as Kodak Color Plus or similar, Clark and York Color labs still has very cheap processing and printing for around $3.75 a roll. </p>

<p>Also-> Dan, I am quite envious </p>

[william_y]

<p>Don't expect to go to the corner drug store and buy film cheap, or even buy it at all, because they won't have it nowadays. But there are still PLENTY of options for getting film at a really good price.</p>

<p>My local WalMart sells 4 rolls of Fuji 100ISO for $6.84. That figures out to $1.71 a roll. Those are 24exp rolls. I think I can afford that. </p>

<p>If you don't like WalMart, go to Ebay. I have no problem at all finding any number of great deals on film from Ebay. I never pay more than $2 for a 24exp roll (incl shipping) for film that isn't even out of date. Lucky brand film from China is cheap and good, and takes only about 10 days or less to get to me all the way from China, for example. But there are plenty of domestic sources of good, inexpensive 35mm film. Just look for it.</p>

<p>Regarding cost in general of using film vs digital..... I was amused by the comment about taking 500 pictures on a DSLR for a weekend trip. What the hell are you going to take 500 pictures of during one weekend? I'm not impressed by that line at all. This "GOTTA HAVE IT RIGHT NOW"/"MORE IS ALWAYS BETTER" mentality suggests the obvious: work for quality, not quantity. 500 pictures that are crap are worth nothing. 50 pictures that are good are well worth the $20 film and processing cost.</p>

<p> </p>

[william_y]

<p>No excuses, you can afford this folks:</p>

<p>http://www.ebay.com/itm/10-rolls-Lucky-Super-200-Color-Negative-Film-35mm-36exp-/250641641449?pt=US_Camera_Film&hash=item3a5b67efe9</p>

[william_y]

<p>Processing, no excuses folks, you can afford this. This is about $6 to process and print a 24exp roll. Add a CD for $3 if you want. Or buy a scanner like I did for $45 on Ebay, or you can use the multi-fuction fax/printer/scanner already on your desk and scan your prints.</p>

<p>http://www.yorkphoto.com/Content.aspx?Page=Order+Form+%26+Mailing+Label#.UDDgJM_Xb_Z</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<p><img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00a/00ajSq-490941584.jpg" alt="" width="609" height="700" /></p>

<p>Daniel, how do you make the numbers work...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>According to our research, the life span of a new deep freeze averages eight years. So, factoring in our cost per year, <strong>the cost of owning and maintaining the deep freeze is about $130 per year, or about $11 a month.</strong><br>

This means that <strong>for the deep freeze to be worthwhile, we have to get $11 or more in savings per month out of it.</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong> </strong><br>

<a href="http://www.thesimpledollar.com/2007/07/16/is-a-deep-freezer-worth-it/"><strong><br /></strong>Source.</a></p>

[william_y]

<p >Here's a list of (mostly) mail order film processors. The ones I have used are marked with an '*'. Just because a processor does not have a “*” doesn't mean they aren't good, it just means I have not used them. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >If you know of more good processors, please share!</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Apertures Photo, <a href="http://www.aperturesphoto.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=215">http://www.aperturesphoto.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=215</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Bison Photo, <a href="http://www.bisonphoto.com/35mm_Film_developing.html">http://www.bisonphoto.com/35mm_Film_developing.html</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Clark Color, I've been using this place for years, have always been happy, recently they have screwed some things up for me though, rethinking before I send them anything more, <a href="http://www.clarkcolor.com/Content.aspx?Page=Order+Form+%26+Mailing+Label#.UDEMrc_Xb_Y">http://www.clarkcolor.com/Content.aspx?Page=Order+Form+%26+Mailing+Label#.UDEMrc_Xb_Y</a> </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Darkroom (The), <a href="http://thedarkroom.lifepics.com/net/Login.aspx">http://thedarkroom.lifepics.com/net/Login.aspx</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Dwayne's Photo, <a href="http://dwaynesphoto.com/">http://dwaynesphoto.com/</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >E-Six Lab, <a href="http://www.e-sixlab.com/c41.htm">http://www.e-sixlab.com/c41.htm</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Gamma Imaging, <a href="http://gammaimaging.com/darkroom-printing/film-processing/e-6_c-41/">http://gammaimaging.com/darkroom-printing/film-processing/e-6_c-41/</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Lomography.com, <a href="http://usa.shop.lomography.com/films/film-development-services/135-standard-development">http://usa.shop.lomography.com/films/film-development-services/135-standard-development</a> (Note: I would like to try them but they are pricey.)</p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Marin Filmworks, they do a great job, <a href="http://marinfilmworks.com/color35mm.html">http://marinfilmworks.com/color35mm.html</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Photographic Works, <a href="http://www.photographicworks.com/order.htm">http://www.photographicworks.com/order.htm</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Process One, they do a great job, <a href="http://processonephoto.com/mail-order-advantix-aps-film-developing.htm">http://processonephoto.com/mail-order-advantix-aps-film-developing.htm</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* SF Photoworks, they have a very nice newsletter too called “News and Notes”, I like this place, <a href="http://www.photoworkssf.com/services-and-rates/film-processing">http://www.photoworkssf.com/services-and-rates/film-processing</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Swan Photo Labs, <a href="http://swanphotolabs.com/swan08/mailers.ph">http://swanphotolabs.com/swan08/mailers.ph</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Vermont Color, they do a great job, <a href="http://www.vermontcolor.com/index.asp?p=13010">http://www.vermontcolor.com/index.asp?p=13010</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Walgreens, many stores do on-site processing, mine does a great job, price is about $12 for 24exp roll, 1 set of prints, and a CD, and all in one hour.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >WalMart, may or may not return negatives. Ask your particular store them before you drop your film for processing. THE NEGATIVE RETURN POLICY VARIES BY STORE.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >* Willow Photo Lab, he does a great job, contact Neil at <a href="mailto:willowwhotolab@gmail.com">willowwhotolab@gmail.com</a> for prices and mailing instructions.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Wolfe's, <a href="http://www.wolfes.com/services/filmprocessing.html">http://www.wolfes.com/services/filmprocessing.html</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >* York Photo Labs, I've been using this place for years, have always been happy, recently they have screwed some things up for me though, rethinking before I send them anything more, <a href="http://www.yorkphoto.com/Content.aspx?Page=Order+Form+%26+Mailing+Label#.UDEMZM_Xb_Z">http://www.yorkphoto.com/Content.aspx?Page=Order+Form+%26+Mailing+Label#.UDEMZM_Xb_Z</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >(Note: Clark and York seem to be the same outfit.)</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

[DB_Gallery]

Jeff, considering that the value of contents of the freezer is in the tens of thousands, I see it as a small price to pay.

Besides, that is my CPA's job, the numbers thingy...:-)

[RaymondC]

<p>I think the culture has switched to digital. For us we are are in New Zealand. C41 process only might be $6US, but slide proessing might be $25US hence I ship my slides to the USA. C41 D+P might be $16US for us. Print film good ones might be $10US a pop and Velvia for example is $30US. If we went to the supermarket Kodak Gold or Fuji Superia 400 is like $15US for maybe 3 rolls. </p>

<p>The average person would think why should I shoot film, if I can take pictures of family and friends and my dog with a digital camera. I don't have to muck around. They're not pro pictures, just some snapshots. </p>

<p>Even if they make it free like I said you may get some enthusiasts to give it a go. Pro's would use digital because of the low cost and quick turnaround, ie., same day turnaround to boss or client or everyday person to pop on FB to document their status close to being "live". A photo geek here that I know, we had a city fire recently, he went their with his Canon 5D II and two L series glasses and shot 300 images. It's been a culture that you shoot more and sort it out later in software and I guess prior to digital taking force, PJs I would imagine PJs would had shot 5-10 rolls of film on smallish event and more so if it was wedding or some international major event. </p>

<p>I only shoot film if it is something I envisioned or going on a trip but I keep it down to 12 frames a day. </p>

[chrisnielsen]

Ray, for awesome e6 and c41 try my lab: filmsoup.co.nz

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Let's hope this theory is wrong.</p>

<blockquote>

<h1 >If film doesn't become cheap then nothing else will matter and it will die</h1>

</blockquote>

<p>(sorry about that formatting, it came in that way when I pasted).</p>

<p>It appears that film prices are about to go up. We've got Kodak talking about raising prices.<br>

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20120815/BUSINESS/308150040?nclick_check=1<br>

And, apparently, we just lost Fotokemika, aka EFKE, which means there's less competition and price pressure on Ilford.<br>

http://www.photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00ajxK</p>

[randyjay]

<p>I may not be able to comment with the elequence most of you have, but at my age, I can tell you a tale. <br>

Back when video cameras were the rage, I shot about 99% of all our family outings in VHS. My film cameras sat in their bags, while like an idiot I grasped onto the craze of the camcorder. Now 30+ years later, I look for photos to remember the kids and happy times, and there are none. All I have is a bunch of old video tapes. About 15 years ago, I got back into using my cameras, and everything I shot is on negatives I can scan onto my computer anytime I want. Now comes the rub....I have a Sony DSLR and a lower priced Kodak Easyshare, and I can't remember what I shot. Being on a fixed income and retired, I can't afford to have a box full of memory cards. <br>

I fear the CMOS may be a repeat of the old VHS experience. I get my film processed now for $3.00 a roll, and I don't buy prints.</p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>I'm stocking up on 35mm Ektar and 4x5 Ektar. My B&W use is all Ilford. And my 400 speed color is Fuji 400h. If I hear Fuji is cutting that film, I will buy a few thousand rolls and freeze it. I'm watching this Kodak thing....but I may place an order for a couple of hundred rolls of Ektar to start my stock pile....and a few hundred sheets of 4x5.</p>