Ilford Price Increase June 1st 2011

Kevin Caulfield · May 28, 2011

Yep, me too.

rst · May 28, 2011

Yes, me too and regularly.

Cheers
Ruediger

mwdake · May 28, 2011

Me too but to tell the truth I just purchased 20 rolls of Acros 100 in 120 for $2.69 a roll.
I'll probably be buying a similar amount of HP 5 very soon.

pentaxuser · May 28, 2011

mwdake said:
Me too but to tell the truth I just purchased 20 rolls of Acros 100 in 120 for $2.69 a roll.
I'll probably be buying a similar amount of HP 5 very soon.

You haven't said as much but it sounds as if the HP5+ will be about the same price?

Anyway this price for Acros 120 would be " film user paradise" if it were available for anything near this price in the U.K.

No wonder a lot of users in the U.S wonder what our concern and moans are about with Ilford prices if they think that we can get it anywhere near this price.

Unfortunately we can't - not even close. I make a pledge here and now for me and I suspect I can say the same for a lot of fellow U.K. and European users, if not all. If we can get anywhere near these prices I will forever hold my peace.

pentaxuser

Bob-D659 · May 28, 2011

Ilford don't buy silver on the spot market, they buy on long term purchase contracts. Pretty sure Simon Galley mentioned this before. BUT, when it's time to sign a new contract and the spot prices are way up, they have to pay more, no way around it.

R gould · May 28, 2011

pentaxuser said:
You haven't said as much but it sounds as if the HP5+ will be about the same price?

Anyway this price for Acros 120 would be " film user paradise" if it were available for anything near this price in the U.K.

No wonder a lot of users in the U.S wonder what our concern and moans are about with Ilford prices if they think that we can get it anywhere near this price.

Unfortunately we can't - not even close. I make a pledge here and now for me and I suspect I can say the same for a lot of fellow U.K. and European users, if not all. If we can get anywhere near these prices I will forever hold my peace.

pentaxuser

Pentaxuser,
How right you are, if in the U.K Ilford prices were on a par with what they are in the U.S.A. I for one would not be complaining about this and would forever be using their products, but we are charged almost double the USA price for film,paper, and for me Ilford has priced itself out of the market in the UK, when I can get paper that is just as good, or even maybe better than the Ilford product,at half of the price, I am refering to Fotospeed FBVC, made for fotospeed by Harman, anjd subject to both Harman QC and Fotospeed QC, and the Ilford equilevent in their RCWT, I can get Fotospeed for £19 per box of 50 sheets 91/2x12, the size I mainly use,compared to around £42 per box the same size for the Ilford product The fotospeed paper is as warm,if not slightly warmer with the right developer,so for me it is a no brainer,I support Harman in so much as they make the paper under contract, but the FS paper has only seen a small increase over the last year, this is the second price rise from Ilford in 2 months, Please note I am referring to the U.K and European market only, and while the FS paper is around I will use it,
Richard

benjiboy · May 28, 2011

Life's a bitch, then you die

railwayman3 · May 28, 2011

CGW said:
It is elementary economics that , with any consumer products, not just photographic, ongoing price increases will, eventually, be counterproductive and affect the volume of sales, especially at a time of recession and economies and in a decliming market, as customers move to cheaper options, use less, or even postpone purchases altogether.

Harman hasn't cornered the world's silver market. Are they supposed to eat the increase in silver prices to hold film prices down? Doubtful.

Of course they haven't.....but, like it or not, and whatever the reason (and I'm sure that Ilford will not have taken the decision lightly), increased prices will
reduce sales unit volume. Few customers are lucky enough to have unlimited funds to spend on anything, hobbies or essentials.

I'd also agree with the later comment that the digital option, with proper costing, is not a cheaper choice....and, as we analog fans fully understand, it's far less satisfying in most respects. But, sadly, many (most?) people perceive it that way and are happy with their quick-and-cheerful tiny pics on their smartphone screen.

I'm not criticising Ilford or anyone, just making a statement of the facts as I see them...which is basically that high costs, be it silver or (as Ilford also state) other production costs, are bad news for our hobby.

mwdake · May 28, 2011

You haven't said as much but it sounds as if the HP5+ will be about the same price?

HP5+ in 120 is about $3.50-$4.00 here in the US.
Yes, I couldn't believe the supplier of my Acros continues to sell it at $2.69; they seem to alternate between in and out of stock all the time. I hope they don't see this and figure they should raise the price.

I feel for you all having to pay those high prices in the UK.

2F/2F · May 28, 2011

Too bad. I switched from Ilford for most things some time ago, though. It's terrible. I love their products. They are just exorbitant now. As long as Arista Premium is here, I will use that instead of HP5. Then we will see what happens when that is gone.

I wonder why products like Oriental, Adox, Fotokemika, etc. have been able to minimize their price increases during this time, while Ilford's have got out of hand. A box of Ilford fiber paper has gone up about $30 per box in the past five years, while Oriental has gone up about half as much. This makes me think there is more to it than simple raw materials costs. Perhaps Ilford products really aren't selling that well in the grand scheme of things.

R gould · May 28, 2011

mwdake said:
HP5+ in 120 is about $3.50-$4.00 here in the US.
Yes, I couldn't believe the supplier of my Acros continues to sell it at $2.69; they seem to alternate between in and out of stock all the time. I hope they don't see this and figure they should raise the price.

I feel for you all having to pay those high prices in the UK.

Good job you are living in the USA, we are paying around the equivelent of $7.00 for a roll of HP5+ 35mm 36 exp and around $6.00 for 120, so perhaps you can see where we are coming from when we complain about the price of Ilford film and paper, it make photography very expensive this side of the pond if we only use Ilford materials, I would have loved to continue to use Ilford film and paper, I have done so for the last 30 years or so, but they are simply getting to pricey for some of us when we can get materials at half the price that are just as good, and the most annoying part is that Ilford stuff is made this side of the water,where as Kodak Film, made in the USA, is in many cases, now cheaper to buy than Ilford here, and no one can say that Kodak film is not of the highest quality,and the prices I quoted are without the latest price rise,
Richard

CGW · May 28, 2011

railwayman3 said:
Of course they haven't.....but, like it or not, and whatever the reason (and I'm sure that Ilford will not have taken the decision lightly), increased prices will
reduce sales unit volume. Few customers are lucky enough to have unlimited funds to spend on anything, hobbies or essentials.

I'd also agree with the later comment that the digital option, with proper costing, is not a cheaper choice....and, as we analog fans fully understand, it's far less satisfying in most respects. But, sadly, many (most?) people perceive it that way and are happy with their quick-and-cheerful tiny pics on their smartphone screen.

I'm not criticising Ilford or anyone, just making a statement of the facts as I see them...which is basically that high costs, be it silver or (as Ilford also state) other production costs, are bad news for our hobby.

What % of your household income goes to film/paper/chemistry/labs relative to: food? gas? utilities? healthcare/pharma? booze? tobacco? Perspective is everything.

mwdake · May 28, 2011

and the most annoying part is that Ilford stuff is made this side of the water,where as Kodak Film, made in the USA, is in many cases, now cheaper to buy than Ilford here

And, the funny thing is it quite the opposite here as many times the Kodak stuff is more expensive than the Ilford stuff.

I grew up in the UK so I always had an affinity for Ilford. I remember getting Ilford film from the chemist shop at the top of my street and learned to print using Ilford papers etc.

Ilford is still my preference for the most part but their papers are getting awfully pricey and I waste a good bit of the stuff making bone head mistakes or not like using little bits for test strips etc. I am almost to the end of what was my large stash of Ilford MG IV, now only 100-150 sheets left.

patrickjames · May 28, 2011

You have to look at this in perspective. I was listening to an interview with Danny Lyon a while back and he said in the early 60's he had to pay a dollar a roll for Tri-X, and that was bulk loading. That means that if film just simply stayed the same price relative to inflation on the dollar it would be around $7.50 today. Film is still really cheap folks! In fact, I would say that relative to everything else, film has never been so cheap!

mwdake · May 28, 2011

Film is still really cheap folks! In fact, I would say that relative to everything else, film has never been so cheap!

I agree, I am OK with the price of film and I have plenty in the freezer to keep me going in 120 and 4x5 for a while.
It is the price of paper that is painful for me.

hpulley · May 28, 2011

Another increase just six months later? I'm still using the stash I bought before the last increase that didn't really even come at B&H!

Jim Chinn · May 28, 2011

mwdake said:
I agree, I am OK with the price of film and I have plenty in the freezer to keep me going in 120 and 4x5 for a while.
It is the price of paper that is painful for me.

I agree. I recently have been going back to Ilford for 120 and 4x5 because I want the quality and consistency. I have been happy with other papers such as Foma and Adox at less cost. But ever increasing costs have impacted my photography. I shoot mostly paper negatives for my 11x14 while I keep learning wet plate in smaller foramts with the goal of eventually shooting 11x14 plates.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 29, 2011

Like most people here, film isn't really the issue for me either. It's definitely the price of paper that is killing my relationship with Ilford. I still use MGWT for my portraits, while everything else has been switched to Fomabrom Variant, which is about 1/2 the price over here in the US.

I was silently enthusiastic with the new textured paper they have produced as well, and while I don't doubt that it's a fantastic product, like everything else Ilford, it's just not something I can justify as an expense. If I used Ilford paper exclusively, I would in fact be spending more money on photography than I do on groceries, clothes, and gasoline every month. I'm actually worried about the future of silver gelatin photography as an art form; this scarcity of raw materials seems to be a much bigger threat than digital ever was to film based photography and darkroom work.

Good luck to all involved!

- Thomas

railwayman3 · May 29, 2011

CGW said:
What % of your household income goes to film/paper/chemistry/labs relative to: food? gas? utilities? healthcare/pharma? booze? tobacco? Perspective is everything.

Well, since you ask, almost negligible at the moment, as I have two full freezers of sensitive materials, mainly Ilford, which, at present usage, should last me up to 10 years.

My contribution won't help one way or the other, but I'm more concerned about the long term survival of film production at prices affordable to the average guy and attractive to new users, not just the committed artists who will sell their house and starve in a a garret before they give up their art.

And I really do want Ilford to be around in 2021, if I still am and I still need to stock up again! To maintain an optimistic perspective, the news of Kodak cutting down might help Ilford.......

Thomas Bertilsson · May 29, 2011

railwayman3 said:
To maintain an optimistic perspective, the news of Kodak cutting down might help Ilford.......

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuer...reLocale=true&pq-locale=en_US&_requestid=4919

I think you're right. Kodak increased profits in total Q1 of 2011, but analog based sales were down 14% year over year. Their core business is, and has been for some time, their digital business.

Yay for Ilford for keeping up with healthy balance sheets, the only good way to do business is to make a profit. It's a tough balance act, I think.

waynecrider · May 29, 2011

I was going to ask if all Ilford paper was produced in England, but I read above that there is a production facility here? Not that it means anything as I don't think there is another manufacturer of paper in the country, is there? I guess overall, if you compare the cost of inkjet ink and paper (let alone chiropractic adjustments from sitting in front a monitor for so long) to the cost of Ilford paper, it must still be cheaper to buy Ilford and to work in a darkroom. I don't know. Just saying.
Another thought is how we have always spent our money on the cheap foreign items from other countries such as in SE Asia, but we never realized what effect it would have on our own economies. So we sit with how many out of work while corporations rake in billions from out of country production and our cash goes where? Probably not back into the loop to fund one's health insurance or retirement fund. Personally, I'd rather support our cousins in the Isle's. Their whole lifestyle cost is substantial beyond photography and I'd rather support them just as I would buy American goods first, even if I have to save to buy them.

R gould · May 29, 2011

Wayne Rider,
All Ilford paper and film is produced at their plant at Mobberly in Chesire in England, and the chemicals are made for them by Tetenal in Germany, they do not produce any film/paper in the US, that is why a lot of folk in the UK are unhappy at paying more for the Ilford materials at home than you do in the US.
Richard

Sirius Glass · May 29, 2011

With the price increase, I may be able to sell the 3 1/4" x4 1/4" Ilford film that I special ordered last year!

Steve

Existing Light · May 30, 2011

I've been a fan of FP4+ and HP5+ for a while, but I've never really used (or tried) their paper. I mostly used Arista paper until recently until I switched to Slavich paper for enlarging (which I rarely do now) and Fomalux for contact printing. I'll support Ilford with my film purchases as long as they make it. And hell, I might even stick with FP5 and HP6 if that ever comes out in my lifetime

This thread reminded me of this picture, and my (for now) undying support for Ilford

marcmarc · May 30, 2011

Remember the good old days when fp4 and and hp5 were re-branded under the Arista brand? Oh those were the days. While I want to patronize Freestyle as much as possible, B&H has Ilford film cheaper. I recently received a shipment of 50 rolls of 120 Pan F+ and even with the shipping cost I figured I saved a little over $40. LA has a sales tax of just under 10%, among the highest in the nation so that adds up as well. Of course this amount went to picking up more Acros 100 which is currently cheaper at Freestyle. I doubt this quantity of film will last through June so I'm going to have to make another purchase before the price hike goes into effect. Given the fact that I really cannot cut back on necessities like rent, gas, and food, I suppose I can sell blood (Hey I'm a universal donor. Yay!) or on my days off walk around town with a "Will work for film" sign around my neck.

Ilford Price Increase June 1st 2011

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency