Is there really a strong interest in film photography?

[Pieter12]

I don't think the demand for film has had much effect on the price, except for retailers not discounting as much as in the past. For some sectors of the market, high prices are not as limiting as others. Serious film shooters will pay for what they want. Most film photographers I know limit themselves to just a few emulsions that they are familiar with and are not necessarily buying different films willy-nilly. There are already enough variables involved in shooting and processing film without introducing new ones. Obviously, if a manufacturer brings out an outstanding product or reintroduces an old favorite, that would be different. Has CatLabs made much of a dent in Kodak and Ilford's market share?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Some people here seem to think that current film prices arise from high profit margins. If only that were the case.
The current prices may be enough to support a smaller manufacturer - that isn't clear - and there may be some supply chain improvements that lower some of the manufacturing and distribution costs that are currently challenging everybody, but a return to the prices of yesterday would drive everybody out of the business, unless the volumes of yesterday also returned.
It has nothing to do with so-called "inflation".

Inflation, the expansion of the money supply, is in effect in America, Japan, Great Britain, Canada, and other countries around the world. Inflation is the main cause of price increases. Costs for material and labor have gone up due to inflation. Supply chain interruptions have some temporary effects. But won't last. Inflation and the devaluation of the various currencies will. This is especially true about films as most of these are made in America, Japan, and Great Britain where inflation is persistent. Since photographers' salaries don't increase at the same percentage as goods and services they purchase, they buy less film and spend more of their money on necessities.

Interestingly, the differences in currency value among countries have a great effect. For example, since the American dollar is increasing in value to the Japanese Yen, British pound, and Canadian dollar, Kodak films that are made in America are more expensive to photographers purchasing in those countries. Likewise, Fuji and Ilford are produced in Japan and Great Britain and should be cheaper to Americans purchasing them in the USA because of the stronger dollar. So differences in relative value between currencies affect sales of the various films as well.

 

[VinceInMT]

Agree, and if and when the cost of film and processing becomes more affordable the demand will increase significantly.

Regarding the cost of film photography, I suppose it's relative to one's disposable income but I wonder how many who are concerned with the price of a roll of film have no problem buying a cup of coffee/latte/frappucino for $5-7 that can be made at home for 25 cents.

 

[Pieter12]

Regarding the cost of film photography, I suppose it's relative to one's disposable income but I wonder how many who are concerned with the price of a roll of film have no problem buying a cup of coffee/latte/frappucino for $5-7 that can be made at home for 25 cents.

Because you have to be home to make it.

On the other hand, expenses some people used to have, have pretty much gone away—postage (except packages), cable TV for some, replaced with streaming services, some forms of entertainment like music in a physical medium, newspapers, magazines, some shopping trips, film, processing and printing for the overwhelming majority. Businesses have also been able to cut expenses and employees because of new technology.

 

[jtk]

I find reading very important. There's no such thing as "free time" for me (my time has always been expensive for me or for my clients).

I am in the middle of a small photo project...printing portraits for an important patron of the arts in my city. He's seen them before, offered to buy them, but I insisted he take them as gifts.

I have a couple of historic collections and/but scanned them a decade ago. I'm wondering if I want to spend my expensive time reorginizing/reprinting (the scans are excellent) or if I should simply give the collections to someone else for free.

Art. by definition, is generosity...but not if the original stuff has no value to the artist. If we have unprinted negatives they have no value to the photographer.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Because you have to be home to make it.

On the other hand, expenses some people used to have, have pretty much gone away—postage (except packages), cable TV for some, replaced with streaming services, some forms of entertainment like music in a physical medium, newspapers, magazines, some shopping trips, film, processing and printing for the overwhelming majority. Businesses have also been able to cut expenses and employees because of new technology.

All the expenses you mention have been replaced by other expenses! ones that have regular billing intervals.!!!

The only regular payments I have are for my too often darkroom chemical and film supplies.
We live in an age of 'pay as you go' breathing becomes the next commodity.

If only the world was black and white.

TB

 

[Pieter12]

All the expenses you mention have been replaced by other expenses! ones that have regular billing intervals.!!!

The only regular payments I have are for my too often darkroom chemical and film supplies.
We live in an age of 'pay as you go' breathing becomes the next commodity.

If only the world was black and white.

TB

True. Almost all those expenses can be covered by a single smartphone and monthly service fee. But now people expect everything else to be free.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Because you have to be home to make it.

On the other hand, expenses some people used to have, have pretty much gone away—postage (except packages), cable TV for some, replaced with streaming services, some forms of entertainment like music in a physical medium, newspapers, magazines, some shopping trips, film, processing and printing for the overwhelming majority. Businesses have also been able to cut expenses and employees because of new technology.

People spend thousands of dollars on communications today. Cell phones, ISP connections, cable, streaming services, and cloud storage. No beepers any more.

 

[MattKing]

Inflation, the expansion of the money supply, is in effect in America, Japan, Great Britain, Canada, and other countries around the world. Inflation is the main cause of price increases. Costs for material and labor have gone up due to inflation. Supply chain interruptions have some temporary effects. But won't last. Inflation and the devaluation of the various currencies will. This is especially true about films as most of these are made in America, Japan, and Great Britain where inflation is persistent. Since photographers' salaries don't increase at the same percentage as goods and services they purchase, they buy less film and spend more of their money on necessities.

Interestingly, the differences in currency value among countries have a great effect. For example, since the American dollar is increasing in value to the Japanese Yen, British pound, and Canadian dollar, Kodak films that are made in America are more expensive to photographers purchasing in those countries. Likewise, Fuji and Ilford are produced in Japan and Great Britain and should be cheaper to Americans purchasing them in the USA because of the stronger dollar. So differences in relative value between currencies affect sales of the various films as well.

Nothing we are experiencing right with film prices or almost all prices has anything to do with the money supply.
And now I will report this and the other related posts, because they are politics - nothing to do with photography!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Nothing we are experiencing right with film prices or almost all prices has anything to do with the money supply.
And now I will report this and the other related posts, because they are politics - nothing to do with photography!

Matt, we're not discussing politics. We're discussing economics. How can you discuss why film is costing more without discussing economics? How is inflation political while supply chain disruptions are not political? Sure, politics affects these things. But no one mention that. But the basis of film prices is economics and inflation has a major effect on costs and prices.

 

[MattKing]

And the assertion that inflation is due to the money supply is nothing but politics, as is the assertion that the current price instability is the same as inflation.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

And the assertion that inflation is due to the money supply is nothing but politics, as is the assertion that the current price instability is the same as inflation.

Then you shouldn't allow any discussion on the costs of film photography as all roads lead back to politics.

 

[Helge]

If a new player like Adox decides to make C41 film, that divides the market further than it is now where it's just Kodak and Fuji. You're assuming margins can be tightened and further cost reductions can be made, after covid where companies were struggling to survive that may not be the case.

I wouldn't want to see a situation where dividing the market into pieces that are too small to be profitable for anyone means that some or all of the players either go bankrupt or decide it's not a business they want to be in. Fuji for example, could easily exit the photography market and it would have little effect on the corporation, but I'd hate to lose Fuji films.

The prices of yesteryear was a result of panic before closing time from Fuji and Kodak in the late 90s/early 00s.
I know full well that it isn’t tenable to return to those.

That said, competition, as long as it’s fair (not for example someone sitting on a giant pile of cash that they use to drive others from the market through unfair long term dumping), is always a good thing.
Film shooters are a savvy bunch. If there is a good deal to be had, we find it.

It’s anyones guess how much of the price hikes is skimming the cream/hedging your bets/milking the market.
Whenever there is a crisis, there will always be people willing to ride the wave trough, for all it’s worth, always pointing to the crisis as an explanation when questioned.

My bet is that for example Portra 400 and Tri-X is overpriced. It can’t cost that much more than other film to make, and the price increase it’s to stem and milk the market for people who insist on it.
Which is a pity because fast film is a prerequisite for film to thrive, with people used to low light shooting with even an iPhone.

 

[Agulliver]

Where could we see your film stills and movies of jazz artists and the club?

I've made a selection available for public view @angusgulliver on Instagram
Also @thebearclub_grrr share some of mine

I post more on facebook but only accept friends requests from people I've had some level of communication with. However my current club photo album is public and you could find that by looking for "Angus Gulliver" on facebook.

Regarding film price, when I spoke with Andy Church of Kodak-Alaris earlier this year he made it clear that the only way prices are ever coming down is if there's continued increase in film demand. For the time being the hope is that there will be no need for more significant increases following investment in increasing and stabilising film production.

 

[Agulliver]

It’s anyones guess how much of the price hikes is skimming the cream/hedging your bets/milking the market.
Whenever there is a crisis, there will always be people willing to ride the wave trough, for all it’s worth, always pointing to the crisis as an explanation when questioned.

My bet is that for example Portra 400 and Tri-X is overpriced. It can’t cost that much more than other film to make, and the price increase it’s to stem and milk the market for people who insist on it.
Which is a pity because fast film is a prerequisite for film to thrive, with people used to low light shooting with even an iPhone.

Hasn't it been stated several times that the profit margin on 35mm film for the likes of Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and Foma is about 2% ?

I know my local retailer makes about 50p profit per roll sold.

 

[MattKing]

Then you shouldn't allow any discussion on the costs of film photography as all roads lead back to politics.

Only for the tiny percentage of people who attribute everything to politics.

 

[Helge]

Hasn't it been stated several times that the profit margin on 35mm film for the likes of Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and Foma is about 2% ?

I know my local retailer makes about 50p profit per roll sold.

I don’t know, has it? Where?
I’d be very surprised if Kodak, Fuji and Ilford has actually divulged these numbers.
Even if they had, how much trust are we to put in them?
A profit margin of 2% would be extremely slim and sounds wildly implausible. No business can thrive, to any degree, on that little.
Unless you are calculating “profit margin” in a different way.

Only for the tiny percentage of people who attribute everything to politics.

But everything is politics. Or politics is another word for sociology, psychology, network theory etc.
Name one aspect or field in the realm of humanity that couldn’t be said to have politics in it.

 

[koraks]

But everything is politics. Or politics is another word for sociology, psychology, network theory etc.

By the same logic, everything would be technology, everything would be psychology, everything would be everything and there would be no conceptual distinction between terms at all. Everything would be one big conceptual protoplasma and words would be meaningless.

So "on that bombshell" we're going to end the debate on what constitutes politics and what doesn't, leaving it up to us moderators to decide when something has gone far enough, and up to all of us to use the 'report' function to bring up issues that require our attention. If anyone feels it's useful to discuss the exact delineation of the concept of politics as used on an internet forum, please feel free to open a separate thread on that in an appropriate place on the forum.

 

[foc]

I don’t know, has it? Where?
I’d be very surprised if Kodak, Fuji and Ilford has actually divulged these numbers.
Even if they had, how much trust are we to put into them?
A profit margin of 2% would be extremely slim and sounds wildly implausible. No business can thrive, to any degree, on that little.
Unless you are calculating “profit margin” in a different way.



But everything is politics. Or politics is another word for sociology, psychology, network theory etc.
Name one aspect or field in the realm of humanity that couldn’t be said to have politics in it.

I am sure @Henning Serger can give you details of the profit margins of film manufacturers (approx). IIRC Henning posted about Agfa, before it exited the market, saying the margins on film were a few cents (I can't find the post).

I know before I retired from photo retail a few years ago, the profit margin on film sales was small. We made more profit from developing and scanning a 35 mm film.

 

[koraks]

A profit margin of 2% would be extremely slim and sounds wildly implausible. No business can thrive, to any degree, on that little.

Retail in some sectors has fluctuated around this level for decades. This includes commercially successful supermarket chains. For manufacturing, however, a 2% margin is dangerously low and indeed generally deemed unsustainable. So it depends on industry as well as company characteristics.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The prices of yesteryear was a result of panic before closing time from Fuji and Kodak in the late 90s/early 00s.
I know full well that it isn’t tenable to return to those.

That said, competition, as long as it’s fair (not for example someone sitting on a giant pile of cash that they use to drive others from the market through unfair long term dumping), is always a good thing.
Film shooters are a savvy bunch. If there is a good deal to be had, we find it.

It’s anyones guess how much of the price hikes is skimming the cream/hedging your bets/milking the market.
Whenever there is a crisis, there will always be people willing to ride the wave trough, for all it’s worth, always pointing to the crisis as an explanation when questioned.

My bet is that for example Portra 400 and Tri-X is overpriced. It can’t cost that much more than other film to make, and the price increase it’s to stem and milk the market for people who insist on it.
Which is a pity because fast film is a prerequisite for film to thrive, with people used to low light shooting with even an iPhone.

I believe that film is competitively priced. There are so many competitors to Kodak and Alaris, that they would be foolish to play games. Also, Portra and Tri-x are admired the world over because they are quality films and have characteristics that film photographers seek. So that will account for some of the higher prices as well. Also, the fact is these films have a double markup because Alaris is not the manufacturer. Kodak is. So each put their profit margins on them unlike, let's say, Ilford which both manufacturers and distributes.

People have to decide if they want a pricier Cadillac with better features or a more affordable Chevrolet.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I've made a selection available for public view @angusgulliver on Instagram
Also @thebearclub_grrr share some of mine

I post more on facebook but only accept friends requests from people I've had some level of communication with. However my current club photo album is public and you could find that by looking for "Angus Gulliver" on facebook.

Regarding film price, when I spoke with Andy Church of Kodak-Alaris earlier this year he made it clear that the only way prices are ever coming down is if there's continued increase in film demand. For the time being the hope is that there will be no need for more significant increases following investment in increasing and stabilising film production.

Unfortunately, I don't use Facebook or Instagram. Is there a link you could provide that would allow me to see one of the videos without joining?

Regarding Andy Church at Kodak-Alaris, did he mention anything about hiring 300 additional workers to expand production? The news of this was released recently in the press? Accordingly, that should lower prices if his statement is accurate.

 

[Helge]

I am sure @Henning Serger can give you details of the profit margins of film manufacturers (approx). IIRC Henning posted about Agfa, before it exited the market, saying the margins on film were a few cents (I can't find the post).

I know before I retired from photo retail a few years ago, the profit margin on film sales was small. We made more profit from developing and scanning a 35 mm film.

He could? I’d be very surprised. For all his knowledge and insider connections, even if he did know he’d be under an NDA.

Yeah, retail profit margin. But do you know the Big Yellow Father, the Great Green Mother or the B&W Kings margins? I’d be surprised and curious.

I believe that film is competitively priced. There are so many competitors to Kodak and Alaris, that they would be foolish to play games. Also, Portra and Tri-x are admired the world over because they are quality films and have characteristics that film photographers seek. So that will account for some of the higher prices as well. Also, the fact is these films have a double markup because Alaris is not the manufacturer. Kodak is. So each put their profit margins on them unlike, let's say, Ilford which both manufacturers and distributes.

People have to decide if they want a pricier Cadillac with better features or a more affordable Chevrolet.

There are? Fuji made the last thing comparable to Portra 400. Kodak pretty much has the C-41 market cornered.
Fuji could make a comeback and I hope they do.

By the same logic, everything would be technology, everything would be psychology, everything would be everything and there would be no conceptual distinction between terms at all. Everything would be one big conceptual protoplasma and words would be meaningless.

So "on that bombshell" we're going to end the debate on what constitutes politics and what doesn't, leaving it up to us moderators to decide when something has gone far enough, and up to all of us to use the 'report' function to bring up issues that require our attention. If anyone feels it's useful to discuss the exact delineation of the concept of politics as used on an internet forum, please feel free to open a separate thread on that in an appropriate place on the forum.

Most things are deeply intertwined and connected. And concepts can and do overlap.
Often it’s a question of degree or grade, rather than a binary politics or not politics for example.

Sorites paradox - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Gödel's incompleteness theorems - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I’m not out to challenge you guys in any way.
You are doing a fine job!
You might just consider using “contentious” or “polemic” as a no go in topics, instead of just “politics”.
That would give you more reach.

It’s hard for many people to wrap their head around the idea that an online forum is not a democracy and that there is no freedom of speech in them.
They are, mostly for good and certainly out of necessity, benevolent tyrannies.

 

[Craig]

Harman publishes financial data (they are required to) and 2021 is the last full filing, which showed a profit of a bit over 5%. 2020 was barely 3%.

I can see why they are cautious about introducing new products generally, as both the margins and total profits are not large numbers.

 

[jtk]

Happily, I suppose, Kodak (the fictional entity) makes its money by licensing its brand name to all sots of non-photo companies.

It's odd that Nike hasn't yet named its yellow sneakers as "Kodaks."

Or maybe that's not so odd...Nike is too smart to do that.