An interview with ADOX's Mirko

Jessestr · Jun 15, 2014

Thanks for sharing my interview! Hope Mirko made his point and film stays alive for many more years.

Jesse

lxdude · Jun 15, 2014

David Brown said:
I wish I had a price list from 40 years ago. Since I do not, I have no way of proving this, but it is my opinion that film may not be much more costly in real dollars than it has ever been. Considering the economies of scale for the manufacturers, that is remarkable. And of course, gear has never been cheaper, so the total cost of doing film and darkroom is substantially less than years ago.

Not too bad.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

RattyMouse · Jun 15, 2014

If Ilford is "robustly profitable", then film prices must be about right.

Louis Nargi · Jun 15, 2014

Thank you

kb3lms · Jun 15, 2014

...but it is my opinion that film may not be much more costly in real dollars than it has ever been. Considering the economies of scale for the manufacturers, that is remarkable.

Other than a few recent examples (bulk Tri-X comes to mind) I agree with this. Back around 1982 when I was in college, I distinctly remember spending $54 a bunch of 35mm Ektachrome 200 (36 exp) for a trip I was taking. It was either 10 or 12 rolls. Compare that to the cost of slide film today. Really not all that much of a difference give the 30 years since.

And a boat is a hole in the water you throw money into.

PKM-25 · Jun 16, 2014

These are indeed the "Good ol' Days", super cheap and fantastic films that are for the most part, less than $10 a roll, amazeballs folks, simply amaze....

Now the price on that 19" wheel and sweet V-rated tire for my Audi S4 that is toast after I hit a large pothole in being blinded by the sun while location scouting an ad shoot last week? $1,100, that hurt, lol!

RattyMouse · Jun 16, 2014

PKM-25 said:
These are indeed the "Good ol' Days", super cheap and fantastic films that are for the most part, less than $10 a roll, amazeballs folks, simply amaze....

Now the price on that 19" wheel and sweet V-rated tire for my Audi S4 that is toast after I hit a large pothole in being blinded by the sun while location scouting an ad shoot last week? $1,100, that hurt, lol!

Ten dollars a roll? Are you including processing? I pay nowhere near that kind of money. Only the rare discontinued films get close to that amount (Reala 100) as well as 400H (rats!). Acros 100 is $3.50/roll (120 size) here, with HP5 being $4.25 a roll. Provia and Velvia around $6 a roll if I remember right.

Shanghai is usually stupid expensive, but I guess for film I have it good.

RalphLambrecht · Jun 16, 2014

I fully agree with Mirkoon film pricing. the stuff is too cheap and undervalued.Kodak nand Ilford should not drop prices but raise them.The new Polaroid in Holland charges three times what the old Polaroid did and people are buying.Film is unique and almost impossible to make yourself.that has valueFolks who shop for cheap film in Eastern Europe or Asia are killing analog photography for themselves and others.

miha · Jun 16, 2014

Do you care to elaborate in what way I'm killing analogue photography by purchasing Foma film?

baachitraka · Jun 16, 2014

A roll of HP5+ is still cheaper than a beer in Biergarten. Nothing to worry...just develop and print.

darkosaric · Jun 16, 2014

miha said:
Do you care to elaborate in what way I'm killing analogue photography by purchasing Foma film?

Fomapan films are good films, and Foma papers are excellent. Foma MG papers are not just excellent, they are superb and unique; for Lith printing it is hard to find anything better.

Another east European factory that was here until recently was Fotokemika - the products of Fotokemika were superb - equally good as Ilford and Adox.

miha · Jun 16, 2014

Seconded Darko.

baachitraka · Jun 16, 2014

Foma MG papers are no cheap compare to Adox but I also like how Fomapan 100/400 prints.

removed account4 · Jun 16, 2014

great interview. thanks for the link!
===

if buying film and paper are the things that matter
i don't see how buying from a less expensive supplier
is killing photography. people don't buy their materials
and they close down it affects us all (fewer people buying raw materials
less demand, less need to sell the materials &c ). everyone has
their favorite suppliers some expensive, some less expensive and some ..

i am also told i helped kill analog photography because i can't afford to buy
film that is expensive, or because i am using materials for other purposes..
photography has never been for someone without a fat wallet, affordable supplies
make it that people who want to enjoy photography will be able to enjoy photography

the room is big, there are lots of chairs and as long as someone is serving
hors d'oeuvre there's no reason not to eat

Sal Santamaura · Jun 16, 2014

RattyMouse said:
If Ilford is "robustly profitable", then film prices must be about right.

The only film prices one can conclude are "right" from its reported "robust profitability" are HARMAN's wholesale prices. Given the specific mix of product volumes it moves and integrated cost of production for those items. Extrapolating from that to the general still film market is not appropriate.

It is easy for many to forget that price and production cost are unrelated beyond a manufacturer needing to sell for what it considers an acceptable profit margin. Unit cost is the sum of labor/material expenses, allocated equipment/facility/utility burdens plus general and administrative charges. Unit price is determined solely by the market, which has absolutely no concern with cost of manufacture. Potential buyers evaluate whether to purchase products/services offered for sale based on perceived value (a combination of cost to the buyer and need/want) along with available funds.

Each film manufacturer will have different sales volumes, costs of production and its own idea of what constitutes an acceptable level of profit. Mirko's comments are absolutely valid for Adox. They probably don't apply directly with respect to Kodak, Fuji, Ilford or Foma products.

Jessestr · Jun 16, 2014

Sal Santamaura said:
Each film manufacturer will have different sales volumes, costs of production and its own idea of what constitutes an acceptable level of profit. Mirko's comments are absolutely valid for Adox. They probably don't apply directly with respect to Kodak, Fuji, Ilford or Foma products.

That's why I thought too. That's why I asked him if it was harder to survive in the market as a smaller company. If Ilford is doing well, that's great. I hope Ilford & Adox will still live for years to come. About Kodak.. they can if they change their plans and be more concerned about film shooters.

Just off topic: if Kodak ceases production of color film. Everyone will jump to Fujifilm right? Which gives fujifilm an increase of sales, which means they can run for a much longer time?

PKM-25 · Jun 16, 2014

RattyMouse said:
Ten dollars a roll? Are you including processing? I pay nowhere near that kind of money. Only the rare discontinued films get close to that amount (Reala 100) as well as 400H (rats!). Acros 100 is $3.50/roll (120 size) here, with HP5 being $4.25 a roll. Provia and Velvia around $6 a roll if I remember right.

Shanghai is usually stupid expensive, but I guess for film I have it good.

Erm, that is why I said *less* than $10 a roll, with the exception of course being the 30 rolls of 400X I got from a store that had it in the fridge.

PKM-25 · Jun 16, 2014

Jessestr said:
About Kodak.. they can if they change their plans and be more concerned about film shooters.
Just off topic: if Kodak ceases production of color film. Everyone will jump to Fujifilm right?

Not everyone who shoots black and white film shoots color film, so it might not end up being a case of "Everyone" jumping to Fuji for color film.

As for the other statement about Kodak, I am glad you said that, I would like to address something that you said in which Mirko gave it to you straight:

"Ive seen that Kodak Alaris isnt really caring any more about its film community. They just provide whats necessary, or at least that is what they have told."

This is not based on fact now is it, this is an opinion of yours that was posed as a question. If you search my past posts, you will find that I defend Kodak a LOT because of how they continue to take a bashing when they are still making and stocking some of the very best films in the world at *very* reasonable prices. You even post a link to the Kodak Professional FB page on your own FB page and then state this, kind of not-so-cool, right?

I encourage you to actually write or call some of the folks at Kodak and address what you asked Mirko, that way you can get facts. Because I think you are on a good path with the encouragement of young folks who are not worn out and jaded like other film users are.

You are doing good work, you owe it to your self...

MattKing · Jun 16, 2014

Jessestr said:
Just off topic: if Kodak ceases production of color film. Everyone will jump to Fujifilm right? Which gives fujifilm an increase of sales, which means they can run for a much longer time?

Or if Kodak ceases production of colour film, the damage to the marketplace, including damage to the business of Kodak's suppliers, may make it seriously uneconomic for all the remaining manufacturers of both colour and black and white film to continue to sell at anything close to the current prices.

Kodak's leaving the marketplace would not be good for anyone else in the marketplace.

AgX · Jun 16, 2014

I do not see that dependancy on Kodak

StoneNYC · Jun 16, 2014

I have to agree with AgX to an extent.

I think that C-41 would be in serious danger but I think the boost to E-6 would help Fuji.

The only concern would be RA-4 printing supplies which would probably have the hardest time.

pbromaghin · Jun 16, 2014

MattKing said:
Or if Kodak ceases production of colour film, the damage to the marketplace, including damage to the business of Kodak's suppliers, may make it seriously uneconomic for all the remaining manufacturers of both colour and black and white film to continue to sell at anything close to the current prices.

Kodak's leaving the marketplace would not be good for anyone else in the marketplace.

PE addressed this supplier issue a couple years ago. Harmon and Kodak use different suppliers on different continents. One will not hurt the other.

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 16, 2014

Harmon and Kodak

Just nick-picking, but it is HarmAn. If you go to the Ilford Photo site, you'll learned where the name comes from.

pdeeh · Jun 16, 2014

Ricardo Miranda said:
Just nick-picking, but it is HarmAn.

Just nit-picking, but it is nit-picking

removed account4 · Jun 16, 2014

pbromaghin said:
PE addressed this supplier issue a couple years ago. Harmon and Kodak use different suppliers on different continents. One will not hurt the other.

i wish i could read ron's posts about this because i seem to remember it isn't necessarily the suppliers
but the raw materials might not be put on the market at a price the remaining suppliers+finishers could afford
to re-sell a finished product at an affordable price...

An interview with ADOX's Mirko

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency