• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Break down: Why film costs what it does

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,018
Messages
2,833,870
Members
101,074
Latest member
T B
Recent bookmarks
0

StoneNYC

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format
Nice theory. Except Acros costs the same as TMX now (though Acros used to be a high-priced outlier) and there is no substitute for TMY2 - Delta400 isn't as good and it's not even available in sheets.

Once you get into traditional-grain films though, you are right. There's no Plus-X compared to the excellent pricing on FP4+ and the eastern-EU offerings.

I haven't used Delta 400 yet but the D3200 is so sweet I can't imagine the Delta is that bad.

HP5 personally I find really nice, just smooth.

To each their own.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
20,023
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Delta 400, TXP, HP5+, TMY2, and Acros each are excellent films with different looks. Visually, one isn't a substitute for the others.
 

Quinten

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
335
Location
Amsterdam
Format
Multi Format
Film is super cheap, specially if you shoot medium format or bigger for big prints. Try to get that quality with digital and you are looking at some seriously expensive digital backs that only get you close.
 

dr5chrome

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
461
Format
Medium Format
I really haven't ready what everyone else has written, but I am sure the reply is along the same lines... This question at it's root is, well,, stupid. I don't even reply to this question that come to me directly anymore. If you have to ask it, you should not be doing photography to begin with. Just remember one thing. Those of us left [except the big god-complex stores], are not in it for the money. We are in it for photography.





Which components or processes or forces that go into the manufacturing and distribution of silver halide emulsions contribute the most to the price we pay on the shelf, and to the rise in the cost of film? Is it the silver? The labor? The gelatin? The base? Reduced demand? How much faster has film risen compared to inflation?

I hear a lot about silver being the root. But I have it on good authority that one mole of silver is able to coat 1600 sqft of film. With silver being a bit less than a dollar a gram, that's about ~$100 per 1600sqft since one mole of silver is 107 grams or so. How many rolls of 35 doth 1600 sqft make? I'll tell you in the AM after I get some sleep.



Oh. And I also would LOVE some historical charts on the price of film, even just one emulsion, and even even just anecdotally.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
17,008
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
... so why did you respond to this question if you don't respond to these questions anymore? :smile:
 

pbromaghin

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
3,865
Location
Castle Rock, CO
Format
Multi Format
Checking 100 ft lots in the last Freestyle catalog, Arista film ranges from $1.90 to $2.25 per roll. Delta is as low as $3.05, HP5 $2.70. T-Max tops out at $4.50 With their LegacyPro chemicals processing a roll costs about $.65.

What the hell are people complaining about?
 

polyglot

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
South Australia
Format
Medium Format
What the hell are people complaining about?

Personally, I whinge about $3/sheet for C41 in 4x5" and $2/sheet for top-tier B&W. And I whinge about the 3x Australia-markup, but that's pretty easy to avoid.

However I mostly shoot 120 Acros, which is dirt cheap and produces flawless 16x20s. In the grand scheme of things and compared to historical pricing, film really is quite cheap. If you shoot bulk 35mm, it's practically free!
 

BrianShaw

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
17,008
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
..for this very reason, your smart-ass reply.. thanks for posting it. :smile:
[read my reply again]

tit for tat, amigo. :smile:

I actually read your reply multiple times looking for content, but only found the irony. Anyway, that was a rhetorical comment. But thanks for the reply.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
17,008
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Just remember one thing. Those of us left [snip], are not in it for the money. We are in it for photography.

... but let me address this because it is very important. I'm very happy that there are still folks processing for the art rather than the profit. I was once blessed with a local guy who spoke just like you... but then he wasn't able to feed his family and had to close shop. I still see him and the part that hurts is that after re-wickering his business he still can't feed his family. He was always satisfied being a "poor artist" but being a starving artist is something he simply can't share with his family. As I said... I'm very happy that there are still folks like you and I hope you continue to be profitable enough to stay in the business and eat/feed yourself an dyour family too.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom