FILM PRICE: COULD A RESURGENCE FORCE A MAJOR DROP?

[David Lyga]

From my point it isn't so much a question of expensive or inexpensive!
We all HAVE the money to spent (gues David is one of us with the highest amount on the bank statement ...but he will not state ....what is indeed always smart...)

Which account are you referring to? The one denominated in USD or the one denominated in SFr? - David Lyga

 

[trendland]

Which account are you referring to? The one denominated in USD or the one denominated in SFr? - David Lyga

All acounts I have in mind with a single. + before!
So.. minus : - 245.000,- USD is out of play (of course it must be so = no darkroom any longer ! )

with regards

 

[trendland]

But seriously you must be real good if any bank let you live with - 275.000 USD on your acount !
In normal case further acounts will compensate such minus !

with regards

Ask DT he has real experience with minus acounts !

 

[trendland]

Which account are you referring to? The one denominated in USD or the one denominated in SFr? - David Lyga

Sorry I am just at this moment understand you right !
David - Swiss number acountmanagement is also possible in USD - just if you don't trust
SFr - but the normal case is often the oposite - as your example pretty shows!

with regards

 

[wahiba]

Practically I think the price of film is pretty low by historical standards. I am now retired and it seems cheaper. While i do my own B&W processing I get colour films and C41 processed by a lab. Just the processing and at around £2 a roll, any size, including APS! does not seem too bad.

OK, cine film seems to be very expensive, but then it is a very specialised area. 35mm and 120 are fine, although 120 colour is a bit higher realtive to 35mm.

By the way, economics suggests that when something becomes very popular the price goes up, not down. So a massive, and unlikely resurgence in fim will not result in a price job.

Currently I suspect a lot of film is still being produced on equipment that has been paid for a long time ago. Similarly modern manufacturing and control techniques probably mean making some new machines can be a viable proposition, so long as the return makes it worth while for the manufacturer.

If you want to keep film available, and at a reasonable price the use it, otherwise you will lose it.

 

[David Lyga]

Practically I think the price of film is pretty low by historical standards. I am now retired and it seems cheaper.

I beg of you to differ. I was living in NYC in the 1970s and, regularly, I priced B&W Plus-X in 36 exposure cassettes. For the first half of the 70s decade, it was selling for 63 cents per roll and 120 size was selling for about 45 cents. At that time a beginning store clerk at Gimbels (I was employed in their Herald Square location) was $2.20 per hour, which was barely above minimum wage. Since then, a constant dollar restatement would yield an increase of about 4X.

Using constant dollars to equate, that wage would manifest into, about, $8.80 per hour, today, and about $2.50 per 36 exp roll for the 35mm, and about $1.80 per roll on the 120 size. Even more striking was the price for 100 ft rolls: then, $8. Now? about $75.

So, retiree, perhaps you should re-think your remembrances and, 'by historical standards' which you seem to revere, re-evaluate your 'now it seems cheaper' misguided parlance.

Facts are facts, and opinions are opinions. - David Lyga

 

[AgX]

PS : Here in Berlin / Germany is a district named : " Prenzlauer Berg "btw but there are also some more : middle class businessman (Mirko possible know) are meeting on weekend their friends
sitting in special "hypster caffees" and what do they need ?????
A camera - but it has not to be a modern digital one - oh no !
It HAS TO BE THIS HERE : View attachment 220002

Berlin is not all Germany. To the contrary.
I have never seen what you describe. Nor do I know anyone who did.

 

[trendland]

Berlin is not all Germany. To the contrary.
I have never seen what you describe. Nor do I know anyone who did.

The "Spiegel" wrote about - soon the "Frankfurter Allgemeine" came up within their
"Feuilleton" .....don't wonder about price increasement for iconic cameras of the 50s!

with regards

PS : I am no friend of "Vegan Cafes" but I guess some of that people meanwile transport their
New iPhone XS Max into cafe!

 

[AgX]

I do not rely on magazines, but real life experience.

 

[miha]

Vegan Cafes and film don't go along...

 

[trendland]

Vegan Cafes and film don't go along...

miha if you would come to Berlin and you also would like to work for the media - you for sure
will end at one of such kind of Vegan Cafes and you'll better drink gallons of that stuff to come to the point your contract can be signed.....!

with regards

PS : Don't ever tell that you like meat.....people who stated are working for the
municipal waste collection service meanwhile!

 

[miha]

It's been years since my last visit to Berlin but in the early 2000s "Prenzlberg" was far from posh.

 

[trendland]

Today it isn't a question about film vs digital - it is not about give up smoking or drinking too much! It is about eating animals or drinking "Vegan Vodka". In short it is about :

V S

with regards

 

[David Lyga]

What, eating and sharing company VS a garbage truck!!!?!???!?!?!?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Trendland: Say wha'?

You are definitely a master rambler and dissembler. Not at all intended unkindly, but I think an accurate observation.

I already, definitively, posted on the cost of film in 1977, adjusted for the (4X) inflation increase and shown that we are paying more now.

Yet, people keep conjecturing, often incorrectly.

 

[David Lyga]

trendland, if you do not mind me saying: Within the synergism of both YOU and your EMOJIs, the setting is complete for grand, unmitigated humor. You are, in fact, funny, albeit, at times, highly suspect. - David Lyga

 

[faberryman]

I already, definitively, posted on the cost of film in 1977, adjusted for the (4X) inflation increase and shown that we are paying more now.

I think your memory is off. I looked at a back issue of Popular Photography for 1977. The going price for a roll of 36 exposure Tri-X in New York was $1.95-$2.15. The inflation factor is 4.17x resulting in an equivalent price of $8.13-$8.97. A roll of Tri-X at B&H today is $5.79, meaning film is actually cheaper today by a fair margin. An equivalent 1977 price would be $1.39.

 

[MattKing]

I think your memory is off. I looked at a back issue of Popular Photography for 1977. The going price for a roll of 36 exposure Tri-X in New York was $1.95-$2.15. The inflation factor is 4.17x resulting in an equivalent price of $8.13-$8.97. A roll of Tri-X at B&H today is $5.79, meaning film is actually cheaper today by a fair margin. An equivalent 1977 price would be $1.39.

I am reluctant to use New York prices for the comparison. I think they have always distorted the reality for most of us - particularly those of us who live outside the USA.

 

[faberryman]

I am reluctant to use New York prices for the comparison. I think they have always distorted the reality for most of us - particularly those of us who live outside the USA.

I am comparing apples to apples. There are no readily available prices for film at local brick and mortar stores for 1977 so I am using the best available data.

 

[MattKing]

I am comparing apples to apples. There are no readily available prices for film at local brick and mortar stores for 1977 so I am using the best available data.

I understand that you have chosen this data because of its availability, but I just wanted to point out that it creates problems as well.
Ironically, I have better access to New York prices now then I did in 1977. However in 1977, my local market was significantly more competitive than it is now.

 

[faberryman]

I understand that you have chosen this data because of its availability, but I just wanted to point out that it creates problems as well.
Ironically, I have better access to New York prices now then I did in 1977. However in 1977, my local market was significantly more competitive than it is now.

So do you think film for you in your neck of the woods is cheaper or more expensive than it was in 1977, adjusted for inflation (which may be different in Canada than the US for the same time period)?

 

[NB23]

Please guys, let’s realize that the inflation adjustment index we are given is not an exact science.

 

[faberryman]

Please guys, let’s realize that the inflation adjustment index we are given is not an exact science.

I ordered my supplies from New York in 1977 and do so today. The difference between $8.13-$8.97 and $5.79 leaves plenty of room for variances in the inflation adjustment factor.

 

[MattKing]

So do you think film for you in your neck of the woods is cheaper or more expensive than it was in 1977, adjusted for inflation (which may be different in Canada than the US for the same time period)?

Most things are more expensive now.
For example, a 135-24 roll of Tri-X is $14.99 - way more than 4 times what it cost (for a 20 exposure roll) back in 1977.

 

[faberryman]

Most things are more expensive now.
For example, a 135-24 roll of Tri-X is $14.99 - way more than 4 times what it cost (for a 20 exposure roll) back in 1977.

Yikes! You can save $4.00/roll and get 36 exposures to boot if you buy 10 rolls on amazon.ca, with free shipping. Still, the film photography revival must be adversely impacted with those prices.