What is the price per roll that will stop you using film?

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, Mr.Prime said:

Like others, I'm not likely to give up film anytime soon as it's a special pleasure and I'd reduce the amount of film used rather than give up altogether. However, the cost of slide film has already crossed a threshold for me, I no longer use it. That's a problem because I am not so fond of colour negative film. I've been using Portra which is nice but doesn't suit all uses (and no, Ektar screws with skin tones too much). Recently, I saw some images from Kodak daylight cine film processed in ECN-2 (not C-41!) which were the closest to what I like and I'm going to try some of that next but I expect the scalpers will move in and together with inflation on development lab costs will threaten that option over the long term. 

I am moving toward Kodak Vision too, but after some trial, I prefer C41 to ECN-2. I guess if the target is Kodak movie film, ECN-2 would be the right choice, but if the target is for scanning to digital printers, C41 could be another sensible alternative.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Einst_Stein]

17 hours ago, Bateleur said:

To me its not a question... the pleasure I derive from the process of loading film, development and eventually making a print cannot be expressed in financial terms.

You mean even if it is $100 or $1000, you will still use it? No limit? Honest?

[otto.f]

I'm very fond of Fuji Provia and Kodak E100, but 18€ is too much for me. So I bought one Kodak E100 for special occasions, which have not been there yet and now my slide film is frozen because the expiration date is over. And scanning slides is not my hobby. 

B&W is different and there are quite a few films that are worth the price beneath €10. Delta100 and FP4+ are really worth their price. I can develop and wet print them. These films are worth owning an M7 too

[Mr.Prime]

Prices will depend on there being some competition and that means it needs to be profitable and if anybody is going to invest there needs to be market growth. So, it's our job to generate and show some great film images and use social media to talk up the topic - the more interest the better. We have to reduce reliance living off the past, we need modern heroes. Perhaps the half-frame camera will be helpful. Who amongst you ?

 

I'm wondering why, after the Instagram craze, we don't have square frame on 35mm.

Edited November 17, 2024 by Mr.Prime

[Einst_Stein]

1 hour ago, Mr.Prime said:

Prices will depend on there being some competition and that means it needs to be profitable and if anybody is going to invest there needs to be market growth. So, it's our job to generate and show some great film images and use social media to talk up the topic - the more interest the better. We have to reduce reliance living off the past, we need modern heroes. Perhaps the half-frame camera will be helpful. Who amongst you ?

 

I'm wondering why, after the Instagram craze, we don't have square frame on 35mm.

I doubt half frame camera can contribute much on the film usage/market growth. Due to its smaller frame, it might actually do the opposite. I guess.

My usage of film is mainly to revive my three medium format cameras:Hasselblad SWC, Fujifilm GX680, and GW690. These cameras are not digital friendly due to the lens design or the baby type. If Funifilm comes up with 65mm or 70mm format film back, make it loading 12.5 ft worth of film per load, that is long but within the film processing capability, it would be a dream. 

Following your half frame thought, may be some kind of affordable medium format P&S cameras, make it workable with 120 and 65mm film format as well as 135format (panorama), could help to boost the film volume? May be also usable INSTAX,

I know, this is just a dream, impossible.

Edited November 17, 2024 by Einst_Stein

[Mr.Prime]

I use a Perkeo-2 for mf since losing my Rolleiflex TLR and it's almost point and shoot.,

[mradey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I received an email from Analogue Wonderland (UK based) yesterday evening - rather contemporaneously. They have supplies of short-dated Portra 400 and Gold 200 in 120 at reduced prices. 30% off Portra (£62 for 5) and 50% off Gold (£31 for 5). 

 

Porta, which I availed myself of, is dated 02/2025. Analogue Wonderland assure that the stocks have been stored correctly since production at Kodak facilities.

 

 

[TomB_tx]

10 hours ago, mark_s90 said:

Half frame was the main selling point of most of the small pocket cameras in the day. But over all the format is, they tell me, a real bitch to deal with in the dark room.

Back in the 1960s both Canon and Olympus made half-frame cameras (especially the fine Olympus SLRs) and you could get half-frame negative carriers for popular enlargers, and photo labs were set up to handle processing and printing.

I just bought 3 of the new Pentax 17 half-frame cameras to give to my grandkids for Christmas, and testing them with PanF (ISO 50) was pleased with 8x10 prints from them. The built-in flash makes ISO 50 film feasible for it, once you figure out the flash settings.  My scanner scans 2-shots as one frame, but it's easy to separated them in post. They'll get 72 shots per roll and (being on college budgets) will be asking me to process both B&W & color film. I've been searching for a half-frame carrier for my B22XL enlarger, but no luck so far, I may make one myself in case they want wet prints.

So far all the results I've seen from commercial processors just provide 2 shots on one print.

[Bateleur]

On 11/17/2024 at 4:24 AM, Einst_Stein said:

You mean even if it is $100 or $1000, you will still use it? No limit? Honest?

Naturally there is an upper limit which dictates choices, but being mainly a black and white film user of the Ilford, Forma and Fuji ilk I doubt I'll see the sort of figures you quoted in my lifetime. 

Edited November 18, 2024 by Bateleur

[costa43]

I guess it will always be relative to my means at the time but currently, I am learning the whole home developing side of things so keeping it cheap with Foma (It's around 4 euro a roll where I am and I develop with Xtol so it works out to around 35 cents a roll ) Like @Bateleur, I enjoy B&W more than colour film so it is unlikely that prices will be too prohibitive moving forward. I do also shoot colour and tend to stick with the mid range films that float around the 12 euro mark. As I do not shoot that many colour rolls, It will probably take a while and an extremely large increase in price before the cost becomes a major factor. 

[Einst_Stein]

Reducing the film shooting rate to reduce the total film consumption costs does not work for me.  My minimum film consumption is determined by C41 shelf life time. I mean color films. B&W is another story.

The c41 kit I buy can run 80 rolls of 135 format or 120 format. Once a C41 kit is opened, It should be used up in 3-6 months for the best results. This defines the minimum film consumption rate. Running less film means wasting c41 chemicals. So far it is still acceptable. 

I tried to make C41 DIY. This can reduce the c41 cost, But found I do not enjoy the process. 

[costa43]

5 hours ago, mark_s90 said:

Since you are a FOMA person, have you really studied the differences between lot dates and yearly production?  I have gotten odd results in Foma. I have had oddness with Arista rebranded as well. 

Once i sent 10 rolls of arista edu 400 in for developing. I got the right film back. But half had foma edge marking, and in 100 and 400 iso markings. Even the arista edge markings were in both 400 and 100 iso,  despite ever arista can label being 400 iso

I’m very new to all this and have only been shooting and developing film seriously now for a few months. On the rolls I’ve shot, I’ve not noticed any differences though. 

[williamj]

Given supply and demand and inflation, when film gets to $100 per roll a cup of coffee and a slice of quality torte will probably also cost $100. So while a roll of film costs similar to that I will still buy and use film. At the moment though I haven't shot a lot of film or shot digital, I'm in a down period which I foster because that makes me come back with more enthusiasm, probably some time in 2025 when the fever starts to build up again. To be honest, I think high prices will burn off some users and then the price will stagnate.

[Einst_Stein]

Any price as the result of inflation is nothing worth to talk about. What we film hobbyist are hoping is the proactive move of Kodak or the like to counteract to the threat of digital cameras.

A lot of people still have historical excellent film-only cameras that need encouraging priced films to feed.  

[Hell]

I bought an M6 for about £5000, while an M11 costs about £8000. If it costs £25 to shoot and develop a roll of film, I could go through about 120 rolls before I spend as much as I would have on a digital M. For me, that's several years. 

We're using Leica although we don't need to. We're using film although we don't need to. We're using cameras rather than our phones which take pretty good photos anyway. All because it's a hobby. 

Factoring in the cost of the camera, the more I shoot, the cheaper it gets per photograph, too, right?

These are the mental gymnastics I go through when faced with current film prices.

I've committed myself already, so I will carry on shooting just like I carry on driving my sports car despite rising petrol prices. If I really can't afford it, I'll stop.

[Pieter12]

Apparently, Kodak announced to investors that it would be shutting down film production for a while in order to upgrade their line. I don't know if that means adding equipment or modernizing, but it does say that at least Kodak is betting film will continue to be a reliable and profitable market for them. It doesn't necessarily mean the price will change, but I wouldn't doubt it. They pretty much have the color film market cornered.

[cobbu2]

I only shoot B&W film and only to achieve a desired visual look, so my use of film is limited to begin with. I have a small stash of (obviously expired) HIE which is getting smaller little by little, and the only film I buy fresh these days are P3200TMZ and Delta 3200 (mostly 120 for that). My rate of usage is relatively low, buying in small quantities, but because I like their results, I'll accept any price hike.

[250swb]

On 11/29/2024 at 1:22 AM, Pieter12 said:

Apparently, Kodak announced to investors that it would be shutting down film production for a while in order to upgrade their line. I don't know if that means adding equipment or modernizing, but it does say that at least Kodak is betting film will continue to be a reliable and profitable market for them. It doesn't necessarily mean the price will change, but I wouldn't doubt it. They pretty much have the color film market cornered.

I imagine Kodak will be doing what Ilford did many years ago downscale their production line so smaller batches can be made more economically. This is I think also Fuji's problem, film production lines once upon a time were massive machines and ran 24 hours a day seven days a week, and it was a major undertaking to both shut them down and then start them up again. The last time I heard Ilford run their now smaller line two or three days a week and it produces all the film their market needs. It'll be a great day when Kodak get themselves sorted out and press releases only contain good news!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Anbaric]

It's all relative. According to one estimate, film production peaked at close to a billion rolls a year. A few years later, digital cameras and smartphones had eaten about 98% of this market. The massive production lines of the turn of the century were no longer remotely viable. Demand has risen sharply in recent years, but from a very low base. Kodak needs markedly more capacity than it had planned for at the nadir of film sales, but it will never be anything like the level of production in the glory days.

[250swb]

3 hours ago, mark_s90 said:

Hate to break it to you, but Kodak is barely making enough film to satisfy its customer demand. Making LESS film is not going to help supply OR prices of Kodak film. 

And if Ilford film production  had been fully satisfied by their reduced capacity machines and reduced production hours,, Why did Ilford just get major loads to start building an EXTRA  film production line?

I imagine you didn’t read what I said, which isn’t unusual in the way you to reply to posts. Kodak cannot continue running large machines day in day out, there isn’t enough consumer demand so basically at the moment they don’t do it, hence the up’s and down’s in supply. If they can configure the production lines to make less film but more economically that will work for them and the consumer. My god I hope you aren’t an economist.

Edited November 30, 2024 by 250swb