faberryman
Member
As a percentage of average income, it's still cheaper than Ektachrome was in the mid 1970s (the documentary evidence is not hard to find). Do you want sustainable production of a specialty product or not? The whiny entitlement of aged hobbyists about what were effectively massively subsidised 'halo' product lines post-1990-ish isn't going to cut it.
I may be an aged hobbyist, but I am not exactly sure because I don't how old you have to be to be aged. I am not whining about the price of Velvia because I haven't shot slides in decades, and when I did, I shot mostly Kodachrome 25, so I am really not a potential Velvia customer. I am curious though about how much young film enthusiasts would be willing to pay to shoot a roll of Velvia. If it's $34/roll and you add in processing, mounts and scans, it seems like $50/roll is a fair cost estimate. Are young film enthusiasts ready, willing, and able to pay $50/roll to shoot Velvia and, if so, how many rolls of Velvia would they shoot a year. Is that going to be enough to sustain production? I am not in touch with young film enthusiasts very often so I don't know. I was taking a course at my community college a few years ago and the students were expressing concern about $5.99/roll for black and white film. Maybe that's just a different demographic though. Speaking of demographics, it might be interesting to examine the demographics of young film enthusiasts.
Last edited: