1997 has 243,000 miles all mine
1998 has 163,000 miles of which the last 40,000 are mine - to and from off roading and off roading as in
View attachment 305972
View attachment 305974
Yes that is me driving. It is a government project, just look at the watch to work ratio.
The green grand cherokee was a 1993, the 1998 is a similarly equipt white one.
I think there is a difference between hoarding - which is keeping a large supply and not using it, but having it in case there is an "emergency" - and stock piling which is keeping a large supply that you will use.
My freezer is full of my film stock pile but I shoot all the time. I have it because I do not want to go down to a store, or mail order when I need a roll. I want to be able to just grab what I need, when I need it. In essence I am my own store. It is actually very liberating as it encourages me to shoot more, and not worry about running out of film.
Hoarders on the other hand just look at their stash, but don't dare touch it. Because, ya know, it's for emergencies.
One could think you are writing this as a fact, not your opinion...@MattKing . It's you, the moderators, the control unit that keep this forum well-oiled and firing on all cylinders. Otherwise we won't get enough mileage from this thread.
.
Am I the only one who remembers the ads for the bulk film loaders: "a penny per shot"? These days it's more like 25 cents per shot for kodak black and white bulk-loaded films.
Even as late as 1979 a 100 foot roll of Plus-x or Tri-x was only $9.99 at 47th street photo. (I'm looking at an old ad right now in the August, 1979 issue of Modern Photography.) That works out to about 1.5 cents per shot.
Of course, median family incomes have gone up during that time, but incomes have kept not pace with bulk film costs. For example, in 1979 median family income in the US was about $16,500 per year, and for most families there was probably only one wage earner. Today it's about $74,000 per year, and many families now have two wage earners. Median family income is up about 4.5 fold since 1979, but a 100 foot roll of Tri-x is up about 15 fold during that same time period. It's pretty clear that the price increases of bulk loaded 35mm black and white film are far outstripping the increases in incomes. (Please forgive the slight shift from C41 to black and white film in this post.)
I can buy 100 feet of hp5 here in Ogden for $80 and get about 18 rolls of 36, or 650 shots, which works out to 12 cents a picture. The rate of inflation from 1979 to now is about ten times.
So the price hasn't really changed all that much. When you add in that shooting film means you don't need to upgrade your computer every two years, that a lot of money you save.
You don’t need to upgrade your computer every two years when you shoot digital, so you may want to eliminate those savings from you calculations.So the price hasn't really changed all that much. When you add in that shooting film means you don't need to upgrade your computer every two years, that a lot of money you save.
You should not overlook that the OP did not even log in again since the day she started this thread/her request...
This thread better be closed.
Who cares what happened to the OP, we still putter on nattering on like a bunch of old fart.
There's a very unique 'culture' here at Photrio and it if one isn't used to it, it can be a little off-putting.
I think this happens a lot. There's a very unique 'culture' here at Photrio and it if one isn't used to it, it can be a little off-putting. I think this is often why we lose newcomers to the site unfortunately.
The idea of "affordable" (cheap) film was a transitory phase in the history of photography. I remember shooting color negative film as a teenager, when I made $5 for mowing a lawn. I shot 35mm film much like many here shoot larger format work, with care and thought placed into each image because of the cost. One 24 exposure roll of Kodachrome, Ektachrome, or Kodacolor would last me several months.
I do remember the late 90's/early2000's when Kodal and Fuji films were available in 4 packs for less that $10 at times. That was an aberration, not the norm in photographic history.
"I think this happens a lot. There's a very unique 'culture' here at Photrio and it if one isn't used to it, it can be a little off-putting. I think this is often why we lose newcomers to the site unfortunately."
Oh, no ... well, except for the querulousness, condescending pontification, sheer bloody-minded snottiness; the frequency of uninvited/'volunteer' non-sequiter responses; a remarkably hardcore group of compulsive responders who seem to believe that their 'insights'/rejoinders/wit are an undeserved grace bestowed on the forum which ought to cause a stunned hush to fall.
Maybe it's the average age, now well into the prune-juice/chronic-irritabiity stratum (of which I am a member), but a lot of things are said in a spirit and tone in this heady vacuum of distance and anonymnity that would earn the utterer a shunning if not a kick in the cods if said in person, in meatspace. Thus is it with the Internet, where one may let one's truculence be freely truculent, where jealousies, neuroses, ill-adjuted socialization, ax-grinding and attitude become banners of pride.
There is one truly expert and valued member here who contributes a lot; his style is unfailingly cheerful, positive, helpful, willing, accepting. His shared knowledge - which is vast - is always clad in helpfulness and good humor. And yet, yet, of late, some ill-humored someone with a species of sharp-elbowed wild bug up his nose has somehow found a way to give sneering affront to this chap, and for no apparent cause. Now ain't that just a damned shame.
At what point do you expend the Herculean effort to go online or down to the store to replenish your "stockpile"? When you are down to 500 rolls? 100 rolls? 50 rolls? 10 rolls?
My late father's 1936 Morgan F2 is still on the road. .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?