Shocked at how much bulk TMY-2 costs

[Duceman]

When it comes to B/W 135mm film, I usually buy it in 100' bulk rolls. Have had a few spools of TRI-X and TMY-2 sitting in the freezer a bit. Just ran out of TMY-2, and was looking at getting another roll. I was aware that Kodak had increased its pricing, but wow. Seems the going rate for TMY-2 in 100' rolls is $150 (where it's in stock) prior to tax/shipping. I just checked, and the last time I bought some (three years ago) it was $99... and the time before that it was $55. I just did the math... I'd only be saving myself $0.67 per roll bulk loading versus just buying by the roll. The economics on that don't seem to make much sense to me. Is Kodak trying to price itself out of the bulk roll business?

As much as I would like to stay with Kodak, the Delta 400 100' rolls are presently $30 cheaper.

 

[relistan]

When it comes to B/W 135mm film, I usually buy it in 100' bulk rolls. Have had a few spools of TRI-X and TMY-2 sitting in the freezer a bit. Just ran out of TMY-2, and was looking at getting another roll. I was aware that Kodak had increased its pricing, but wow. Seems the going rate for TMY-2 in 100' rolls is $150 (where it's in stock) prior to tax/shipping. I just checked, and the last time I bought some (three years ago) it was $99... and the time before that it was $55. I just did the math... I'd only be saving myself $0.67 per roll bulk loading versus just buying by the roll. The economics on that don't seem to make much sense to me. Is Kodak trying to price itself out of the bulk roll business?

As much as I would like to stay with Kodak, the Delta 400 100' rolls are presently $30 cheaper.

I can’t speak to Kodak’s intent, but for myself, I happily give Ilford/Harman my money for more reasonably priced, excellent Delta films.

 

[madNbad]

The average rate for a 36 exposure roll of TMax is between $10.50 and $12.00 usd. You may save a few bucks a roll bulk loading Kodak but not nearly the savings of the past.

 

[Duceman]

The average rate for a 36 exposure roll of TMax is between $10.50 and $12.00 usd. You may save a few bucks a roll bulk loading Kodak but not nearly the savings of the past.

I can get 10 rolls of 36-exposure TMY-2 for $90 through Film Supply Club. Savings (for me) is $0.67/roll over individual cassettes.

 

[madNbad]

I can get 10 rolls of 36-exposure TMY-2 for $90 through Film Supply Club. Savings is $0.67/roll.

That's a pretty good deal. Midwest Photo Supply had Tri-X for $99.00 for ten. Might be time to order 400' of 5222.

 

[Daniela]

Had the same shock when I went to buy bulk HP5, and I had bought a roll before the summer...settled for APX, since it's about a third cheaper. Will most likely go for FOMA next time. That's half the price.

 

[pentaxuser]

The economics on that don't seem to make much sense to me. Is Kodak trying to price itself out of the bulk roll business?

As much as I would like to stay with Kodak, the Delta 400 100' rolls are presently $30 cheaper.

Wasn't this a thread some years ago when someone raised the question of why Kodak bulk rolls cost so much vis a vis cassettes when in the case of Ilford and Foma the situation was the reverse? Has the price difference got even worse now or is it actually better than it was despite both Kodak cassettes and bulk rising in price

pentaxuser

 

[Duceman]

I can't speak to any thread from a few years ago, but I can say that a decade (and more) ago, bulk savings over individual cassettes for TMY was around 50%. Less so a few years ago, and now... <10%?

 

[mshchem]

Everything is expensive!

 

[Duceman]

Ain’t that the truth. But, at least for me, not prohibitively so.

I’m just surprised how it’s really not all that advantageous to bulk load TMY versus loaded cassettes.

 

[Bill Burk]

When it comes to B/W 135mm film, I usually buy it in 100' bulk rolls. Have had a few spools of TRI-X and TMY-2 sitting in the freezer a bit. Just ran out of TMY-2, and was looking at getting another roll. I was aware that Kodak had increased its pricing, but wow. Seems the going rate for TMY-2 in 100' rolls is $150 (where it's in stock) prior to tax/shipping. I just checked, and the last time I bought some (three years ago) it was $99... and the time before that it was $55. I just did the math... I'd only be saving myself $0.67 per roll bulk loading versus just buying by the roll. The economics on that don't seem to make much sense to me. Is Kodak trying to price itself out of the bulk roll business?

As much as I would like to stay with Kodak, the Delta 400 100' rolls are presently $30 cheaper.

These days I don’t think of cost savings. Instead I think of setting myself up with enough film for a “project”.

I normally buy TMY2 a few 36 or 24 exposure rolls at a time. I prefer 36 but sometimes 24 is all my camera store has.

I just spent $110 for a bulk roll of Double-X. Unless Double-X gives me bad pictures, I might not need TMY2 for a while. I’ll probably still buy a few rolls here and there anyway.

 

[JerseyDoug]

I try to develop a roll of film every Saturday. The 12-exposure rolls of 120 film I shoot when I am in a medium format mood are just about right. 24 exposure, or worse yet 36 exposure rolls of 35mm film result in a lot of throw away shots to finish the roll. So I bulk load 12-exposure rolls of 35mm film. The cost per frame is much higher than for 36-exposure bulk loaded rolls because of all the unexposed heads and tails on the 40 30" rolls from a 100' roll but my film cost per week, even for Tri-X at today's prices, is much less than for 120 or longer rolls of 35mm.

 

[ic-racer]

Currently I use HP5, 100ft. This thread made me look up some other 100ft "400" options in B&W. This is what I found:

Ultrafine Finesse 400: $61.95
Arista EDU 400: $63.95
Fomapan 400: $69.99
Kentmere 400: $72.99
Orwo P400 : $94.00
HP5 400 : $109.99
Tmax 400: $149.95

I could not find Shanghai 400 in 100ft bulk.

 

[Dennis S]

Kodak Canada seems to be increasing their prices substantially also as a few yrs ago I picked up 400' of the 5222 film for $ 330 CDN. I inquired last week and the prices have risen to $515 with tax & freight. So that would be $128 per 100' so I am reconsidering how much I like this film.

 

[MattKing]

Kodak's production finishing line for the 100 ft bulk loads is slow, very manual, labour intensive and ancient. The machinery is the same as they used when the market for 100 ft bulk loads was primarily school ID and annual photographers, who usually bought it in big job lots.
They are unable to use the same machinery as used for the 400 ft and 1,000 ft motion picture films, due to a number of factors, including the need to print frame numbers on the still films. In addition, Eastman Kodak has standard, commonly accepted accounting procedures for allocating shared overhead costs to product prices, and those tend to penalize lines that require large pieces of equipment and a lot of individual labour to a relatively low volume product.
When volumes were high, the per roll cost was low, and hobby and student users could share in that benefit.
Now, when volumes are so low, the costs per roll end up being much higher than the costs per roll of some other producers.
In contrast, Eastman Kodak's production finishing lines for putting film in 35mm cassettes are fast, highly automated, involve very little individual labour and relatively much more modern. So they can be more competitively priced. The volumes for black and white film are still relatively low though, and the much higher volume colour film lines probably have priority in the finishing queue.

 

[MattKing]

Kodak Canada seems to be increasing their prices substantially also as a few yrs ago I picked up 400' of the 5222 film for $ 330 CDN. I inquired last week and the prices have risen to $515 with tax & freight. So that would be $128 per 100' so I am reconsidering how much I like this film.

The 72 cent dollar has an important role in this.

 

[Huss]

Had the same shock when I went to buy bulk HP5, and I had bought a roll before the summer...settled for APX, since it's about a third cheaper. Will most likely go for FOMA next time. That's half the price.

Try Kentmere - it is excellent film.

 

[Dennis S]

The 72 cent dollar has an important role in this.

That's for sure as I found a 400' roll at B&H and by the time I do the currency exchange it's the same price as Kodak Canada but actually it was $3.00 cheaper @ B&H but you would expect a warehouse to be cheaper. A gentleman here is selling 100' rolls of 5222 film but we couldn't agree on how the $ was to be sent.

 

[Daniela]

Try Kentmere - it is excellent film.

Don't see as a bulk option at my usual seller, but will keep your suggestion in mind for next time. Thank you, Huss!

 

[koraks]

Seems the going rate for TMY-2 in 100' rolls is $150 (where it's in stock) prior to tax/shipping.

I just checked what a 100ft roll of Delta 400 goes at around here. It's around € 135, which works out as roughly $150. That's incl. VAT though.

The only Kodak bulk roll I could find around here is Tri-X, retailing at around €175 inc. VAT, which is close to $190. Since TMY2 is generally a little higher priced (8% or so) than Tri-X, a bulk roll of TMY2 would retail at around $200 here. VAT here hovers around 20%.

Looks like your retail prices are similar to ours, but we have VAT and end up paying a bit more than you do.

Still, how many 36 exp rolls can you get out of a bulk roll? 19 or so? A 36 exp roll of TMY2 retails around €14 here. Looks like bulk can still be worth it in that sense, depending on how you value your time of course.

 

[Daniela]

Still, how many 36 exp rolls can you get out of a bulk roll? 19 or so? A 36 exp roll of TMY2 retails around €14 here. Looks like bulk can still be worth it in that sense, depending on how you value your time of course.

I get around 18 (36-exposures) out of a 30mt roll, and the savings come out to 2€/roll with both HP5 and APX.

Someone above mentioned losing frames when bulk loading and it's true. I lose about 3-4 frames in each roll. I don't think anything can be done to avoid that. Or is there something I'm not aware of?

 

[Ernst-Jan]

Had the same shock when I went to buy bulk HP5, and I had bought a roll before the summer...settled for APX, since it's about a third cheaper. Will most likely go for FOMA next time. That's half the price.

Remind that Foma 400 is also almost half of the sensitivity...

 

[Ernst-Jan]

Don't see as a bulk option at my usual seller, but will keep your suggestion in mind for next time. Thank you, Huss!

It's the same as Agfaphoto APX

 

[koraks]

Yeah, that sounds about right in terms of the economics, @Daniela.

As to the lost frames, here's what I do, using the Watson-style bulk loaders, recycled Fujifilm Superia 35mm cassettes (but other brands will work too) and a proper darkroom:
* Only let a few cm of film stick out of the light trap/gate. No more than ca. 5cm.
* Tape this end to the spindle. You don't have much length to work with, but it can just be done.
* Fit the spindle into the cassette and fit the lid onto the cassette. Ensure the lid fits tightly around the entire perimeter.
* Now turn off the lights.
* Without fitting the cover on the film loader, flip the lever as if the cover has been fitted. Rotate the round cover to open the gate.
* Pull the film roll towards the end of the loader where it mounts onto the axis with the handle you can rotate to load the film.
* Personally, I proceed in the dark from here, simply loading the film in the dark by rotating the handle and counting the turns. 30 turns gives a length of >36 exp. (it's a little longer than a commercial roll, in fact). Alternatively, you could close the gate, pull back the lever, fit the lid, and open the gate again and then turn on the lights to do the rest of the process in room light.

This way, you only waste a few cm's of film at the end of the roll and that doesn't tend to interfere with the last frame(s), so all frames are exposed OK without fogging.

Hope this makes sense. I can see if I can make some photos or a video if it's not clear enough.

The whole trick is simply to only expose a minimal length of film in the process of taping it to the spindle and then ensuring the rest of the film doesn't see any light, apart of course from the leader, but that's a lot less tricky since you have more length to play with there.

 

[Don Heisz]

Kodak's production finishing line for the 100 ft bulk loads is slow, very manual, labour intensive and ancient. The machinery is the same as they used when the market for 100 ft bulk loads was primarily school ID and annual photographers, who usually bought it in big job lots.
They are unable to use the same machinery as used for the 400 ft and 1,000 ft motion picture films, due to a number of factors, including the need to print frame numbers on the still films. In addition, Eastman Kodak has standard, commonly accepted accounting procedures for allocating shared overhead costs to product prices, and those tend to penalize lines that require large pieces of equipment and a lot of individual labour to a relatively low volume product.
When volumes were high, the per roll cost was low, and hobby and student users could share in that benefit.
Now, when volumes are so low, the costs per roll end up being much higher than the costs per roll of some other producers.
In contrast, Eastman Kodak's production finishing lines for putting film in 35mm cassettes are fast, highly automated, involve very little individual labour and relatively much more modern. So they can be more competitively priced. The volumes for black and white film are still relatively low though, and the much higher volume colour film lines probably have priority in the finishing queue.

You know, Matt, you do keep reminding people of Kodak's justification for the higher price of bulk rolls. However, that is actually their problem and any other company that tried to supply a material would actually try to solve it. If it costs them more to put 100 feet of film in a single black plastic bag than it costs for them to put that same amount of film on 18 plastic spools, in 18 metal cans, in 18 plastic tubs, in 18 cardboard boxes -- they're just not doing something right. Yes, the operation to put the film in those little packaged is automated. But the material is at hand to make the bulk rolls. It's not like they have to fire up a separate production run of film to just get that material.

In other words, the justification you spell out doesn't make sense. They could fire up their machine for a couple of days and package half a year's worth of bulk film.

If it's so onerous and expensive - such a losing venture -, they should stop selling bulk film.