The cost of color film and processing

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, if one finds retail work enjoyable and satisfying, and also enjoys photography.
Unless you are a very rare individual, freelance photography is an awful life.

I thought that freelance photography is a hobby masquerading as a career. Tough way to support oneself.

 

[jtk]

https://paulsphotocom-my.sharepoint.com/personal/danny_paulsphoto_com/_layouts/15/onedrive.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fdanny%5Fpaulsphoto%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2FemploymentApp%2Epdf&parent=%2Fpersonal%2Fdanny%5Fpaulsphoto%5Fcom%2FDocuments&ga=1

 

[jtk]

I thought that freelance photography is a hobby masquerading as a career. Tough way to support oneself.

I always enjoyed freelance photography, made a lot of money that way.

I quit because I didn't want to socialize with art directors and clients. Solo type of guy. It'd be easier today because so much wonderful stuff can live online (even Photrio chat), in person mostly with peers and other creative people.

When I left freelance photo I continued to freelance as a headhunter. That was very similar to photography and I made even more money that way.

I've never thought of photography as a mere "hobby."

 

[jtk]

Yes, if one finds retail work enjoyable and satisfying, and also enjoys photography.
Unless you are a very rare individual, freelance photography is an awful life.

Successful photographers and other artists are inherently "very rare" individuals. Some of us are happy to be rare.

Retail is dead end.

 

[DREW WILEY]

My older brother once paid his way through the Brooks photo academy by working in a well-known retail store in Santa Barbara catering mostly to pros. Those kinds of jobs have always paid miserably. But it allowed him to acquire his Linhof and Rollei gear, lenses, and darkroom equip, at a considerable discount, as well as led to a lot of valuable connections as he turned pro. But then he landed a job as a Rolls Royce driver for an extremely wealthy old Montecito couple, which paid much better. That brought more connections. In fact, once he realized the opportunities, his commercial photo career was mostly put on hold when he became a realtor in Montecito. A single estate sale would bring more commission than several years of pro photo work. But he did both in parallel awhile because he loved photography per se. Then the first great fire occurred there, outright destroying many of those lavish estates; and that destroyed his real estate income too.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I always enjoyed freelance photography, made a lot of money that way.

I quit because I didn't want to socialize with art directors and clients. Solo type of guy. It'd be easier today because so much wonderful stuff can live online (even Photrio chat), in person mostly with peers and other creative people.

When I left freelance photo I continued to freelance as a headhunter. That was very similar to photography and I made even more money that way.

I've never thought of photography as a mere "hobby."

You are one of the talented few to make a living these days. It was easier in the first half of the twentieth century.

Yes and being a head hunter could pay a lot better.

 

[cullah]

My late 1960's-early 1970's high school time affects my judgement on this. A 20 exposure roll of Kodacolor-X cost about 1 hour at my minimum wage fast-food job, cheapest processing about 1.5 hours. Kodachrome total was about the same, subsidized by all the home movies going through the labs. E4 (Ektachrome/Dynachrome) was about 20% more. I learned BW lab work because chemistry was available and the school had the equipment.

There was a minilab boom in the 1990's as others have pointed out, cutting prices on both film and processing. Now we're about back at the old ratio of minimum wage to color film roll price, though E6 is hard to find. If you find a youngster with interest, help them out with lab skills.

 

[foc]

Retail is dead end.

Since the pandemic, I agree with that statement.

If a young person wishes to enter film lab work, the big problem is that there is no structured training program. Back in the minilab boom of the 1990s, I remember my local Fuji providing basic training in how to operate C41 processing machines, how to run control strips, colour setup and calibration of printers, and good housekeeping and practice.
They also provided a basic business course in photo retail, the emphasis on D&P and related sales.

Today there are no film lab training programs (that I know of).

Professional photography (wedding, commercial, portrait ) has changed dramatically in the last few years. Some new blood have found their niche and USP and rightly so. Style and market change and so the photographer must follow/lead or be left behind.
I know a few that are making a very good living in my local area (and remember I am out in the sticks)

 

[Huss]

Yes, if one finds retail work enjoyable and satisfying, and also enjoys photography.
Unless you are a very rare individual, freelance photography is an awful life.

Slightly off topic, but not by that much, one 'scam' that some prospective commercial clients (some, not all) do is try to get photographers to work for free.
There are so many trying to make it (digital photography has been a great democratizer), some that do have nice portfolios, that they fall for the 'we can't pay you this time but we will pay you next time (never happens as they move on to the next sucker) and/or it will give you great exposure".

Numerous times I have been approached to give for free images to be sold at charity auctions. With the promise that the exposure would be worth it. I saw what was happening (it would always be some lackey working for the rich persons' 'charity') and never fell for it because I made sure to not rely on my photography as my primary source of income.
But desperate artists do.
I also knew of several gallerists who would give an artist a show as long as that gallerist could keep a selection of their work for free, not matter if they sold any pieces. Some would have group shows and then select what they would keep from all the artists!

 

[AgX]

There are a lot more film related resources available now than there was in the 1950s or 1960s - they just aren't around every corner.

In those years in West-Germany there were already about twice as much photo-stores(!) selling film than today those many chain drugstores around as last local resort. Add to those dedicated shops generic shops and the number gets even bigger...

 

[AgX]

Retail is dead end.

You likely mean brick&mortar or stationary retail.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Slightly off topic, but not by that much, one 'scam' that some prospective commercial clients (some, not all) do is try to get photographers to work for free.
There are so many trying to make it (digital photography has been a great democratizer), some that do have nice portfolios, that they fall for the 'we can't pay you this time but we will pay you next time (never happens as they move on to the next sucker) and/or it will give you great exposure".

Numerous times I have been approached to give for free images to be sold at charity auctions. With the promise that the exposure would be worth it. I saw what was happening (it would always be some lackey working for the rich persons' 'charity') and never fell for it because I made sure to not rely on my photography as my primary source of income.
But desperate artists do.
I also knew of several gallerists who would give an artist a show as long as that gallerist could keep a selection of their work for free, not matter if they sold any pieces. Some would have group shows and then select what they would keep from all the artists!

Then along comes a gwc who just cannot wait to give photographs away just to attract attention.

 

[Huss]

gwc?

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

gwc?

Guy With Camera

 

[jtk]

Then along comes a gwc who just cannot wait to give photographs away just to attract attention.

The truth is/was that the best clients do know what they need but will listen to what photographers suggest... The result is/was that those clients actually paid better and worked with a smaller pool of free lance photographers.

Hard to believe, probably, but the minimum day rate for rookies was $200 in the 80s in San Francisco and if a dubious art director wanted cheaper and a dubious photographer was willing to work for that, there would be a storm of criticism that would reach the art director's creative director and would put the AD's future at risk. The good guys wanted to work with other good guys and the cheap guys put the whole game at risk. At the time my own day rate was around $450, which was partially responsible for the fact that I didn't get the big jobs (none of the $1500 days.). But I was working about three days a week, which bought me a house in San Francisco.

Todays best wedding business often involves a team of three, one shooting still, one shooting video, and one running errands for the other two. I never got into that, mostly because I wasn't into weddings. But free lance photo today ain't always bad.

 

[jtk]

In maybe 1974 I was production manager at an audio visual production studio (Media Generalists) that ran E4 in 5 gallon calumet nitrogen burst tank line and did dupes and optical titles using serious cameras. We had about 4 total employees but brought on a few more for big projects (eg thousands of glass slide mounts for elaborate multi-projector shows).

I got that job through working in the entirely professional-customer supplies-side of a very big camera store. I actively avoided hobby-side. Was contacted and offered the av-company job: I'd made a point of learning a tremendous amount about pro photo, including the av-market and the related companies in the region (San Francisco) as well as a little about the tech. I became well known in the pro community but didn't do any socializing (I've always been bad at that). The whole time I thought of myself as a photo artist and put marriage at risk by massive time spent in darkroom. Was shooting Leica 3G and then brand new Nikon FTn fwiw, but that had little to do with my work.

I knew a bicycle messenger who rode specifically to learn who/where did what in photo/graphics, becoming photo assistant then getting his own photo jobs from there.

Seems to me that very few hobby photographers know zippo about professional photography. It ain't a matter of owning cameras and shooting B&W. It involves hard work, paying dues, and learning client needs.

It must surely be the same way for digital artists/photographers today.

Obviously, if their home town doesn't offer that kind of opportunity they will (if they are honest with themselves) move to a better town.

 

[DREW WILEY]

One of the problems nowadays is that a lot of people think that all you need to be a web designer or wedding photographer is a digital camera; and in fact, there are plenty of skinflints out there that will hire them, even for corporate PR projects, especially if they're a relative. One gets what they pay for, as always. Smart photographers simply price themselves above the nuisance market, and have sold portfolios proving their merit.

I've forgotten the name of that big AV house in SF. It was a long time ago.

 

[jtk]

Drew; Media Generalists, Gregor Greig. Not "big" but we did the very biggest projects, notably PG&E, Walter Landor Design, Portland General Electric, San Francisco Experience, New York Experience, and Republic of China (Taiwan). Smithsonian Bicentennial using IBM prototype controllers. Lots of small projects for corporate home offices such as Chevron Chem, Crocker Bank and Peterbuilt Trucks. Everything multi-projector with dissolves and audio. No simple title slides...we weren't a simple lab though we did run 30-60 rolls E4 daily, sometimes for client friends.

Many 36 hour days, 8 day weeks.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Oh, my mistake. I was referring to the big AV supplies and equip distributor downtown. I only dealt with them a little bit, like for Gepe 6x7 glass mounts & punch etc. They also sold slide registered Nikon bodies in that category. But I'm glad you had experience at the production end of things. There were a number of excellent graphics suppliers around, plus those who bridged graphics with pro photography like Alpha in downtown Oakland. And there was a scientific light bulb supplier in SF who had just about everything imaginable in stock from high output UV to flash, whether US or Euro standards.

 

[jtk]

Interesting. Leitz also had its own independent dealership in SF ...It seemed mostly dedicated to microscopes (SF had some important hospitals and medical research centers).

 

[Huss]

Many 36 hour days, 8 day weeks.

Back in the day of 14 month years.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I used Leitz microscopes back in my college Microbiology study years. Wonderful build quality. Now I'm scheming how to acquire one of those classic vintage 70's Leitz or Nikon phase contrast microscopes, preferably trinocular, for my own use. But I might have to sell an 8x10 lens to do it. There's no shortage of them, but in clean condition they don't come cheap.

Microscopes, survey instruments, and conventional camera gear has always been marketed by wholly different divisions, whether you're talking about Leica, Nikon, Olympus, or Pentax.

 

[jtk]

Back in the day of 14 month years.

Somehow I've not fully escaped that work/sleep pattern. I'm afraid that if I get into 8 hour nights it'll become a slippery slope...though at my advanced age I'm starting to nap in afternoons, when I should working frenetically. I stopped dark rooming years ago in order to clean up one day's work and start ahead of the game for next.

Isn't that how photographers did that in those days?

 

[BradS]

I don’t know. I’ve just returned home from a 5000 mile road trip. Every rural Walmart that I checked along the way stocked 3packs of Fuji Superia X-Tra 400 135-36. Yeah, the price has gone up a little since last year (from $19.00 to $23.00) but, they all still had a small stock of fresh film. They all had a case of instax stuff too. Yeah, it’s not 1995 anymore but things aren’t really that bad.

 

[Huss]

I don’t know. I’ve just returned home from a 5000 mile road trip. Every rural Walmart that I checked along the way stocked 3packs of Fuji Superia X-Tra 400 135-36. Yeah, the price has gone up a little since last year (from $19.00 to $23.00) but, they all still had a small stock of fresh film. They all had a case of instax stuff too. Yeah, it’s not 1995 anymore but things aren’t really that bad. View attachment 316642

Two huge things - in stock. And cheaper than the 'go too' NYC mail order stores.
It's weird though, Superia 400 is cheaper than 200