I don't think the latter is very likely anymore. Maybe there's some lingering around, but the way stock has been moving, I doubt it.
The expense of shooting film
-
A
- Thread starter Huss
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Very nice 300mm f/6.3 Komura Commercial in Copal 3S
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
For Sale Very clean 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon in Copal 0
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Folding Pocket Kodak Plate Holders, Cut Film Sheaths, and Ground Glass
- Started by trichrome
Forum statistics
I don't think the latter is very likely anymore. Maybe there's some lingering around, but the way stock has been moving, I doubt it.
-
- Alan Edward Klein
- Deleted
- Reason: Venturing into politics again, eh.
Point taken. When I’d go to Freestyle back in the 1970s to buy chems, paper, and film, I was working a graveyard shift and making about $4/hour. With inflation, prices are about the same but my income has way outpaced that $4/hour, plus I’m not even working anymore.
and it still costs the same for kodak to MAKE or at least obtain the cassette it puts your film into.. so going by bulk cost versus cassette cost.... using film sold under the same inflation scheme...
One can easily find a big price difference... in that method..
some have stated a 2.5 dollar difference, some 5 dollars..
even lookin at arista film.. factory rolls of 36 exp versus a bulk roll of 100' still show a minimum price difference of 2.50$ USD between bulk rolled and factory
I can see what you mean. In 1963/4 when I was starting out with photography a 36exp Kodachrome was priced at around £1.50 which accounting for inflation in the 60 years after would place the cost probably close to £20.
Even with Ilford Multigrade developer for a 5 litre container was originally about £12 in the mid to late 1980's,
I can still buy it for around £30 so that is being sold at less that it originally was (equivalent).
I have just found an inflation calculator sponsored by the Bank of England, and in 1963 when my wage was about the equivalent of £** and I was working full time, my income now, after taxes, in 2033 now I am retired and on a pension is vastly above that to the order of around 70 times. So perhaps I should not grumble too much.
Last edited:
Wow , has there been a general 250% inflation rate since this mad scramble began? I can't say I have seen anything like that in other goods.
pentaxuser
It’s a lot like buying coffee. You can spend a lot on all the equipment to grind and prepare your own and then cheap out with the bargain beans. If the bargain beans turn out to be as good or better than the more expensive ones, it’s a win.
No one wants to spend more than they have to to feed their hobby and experimenting with different films is enlightening.
No one wants to spend more than they have to to feed their hobby and experimenting with different films is enlightening.
Hmmm. I know the average household is not the average worker, and household income today includes a lot higher percentage of 2-income households, so comparisons are difficult. But a little searching yields:
Median Household Income by Year
| Year | Median Household Income | Inflation Adjusted (2022) |
| 1968 | $7,005.00 | $56,950.65 |
| 2022 | $70,181.00 | $70,181.00 |
From https://dqydj.com/household-income-by-year/
It was a rhetorical question, but good answer. Incomes have gone up about 10x, while Tri-X increased more like 13x. So relative to median income, Tri-X is ~30% more expensive today. Relative to silver it is about the same.
-
- Beverly Hills
- Deleted
- Reason: Inappropriate
BMW doesn't make sports cars any more, with the exception of the M sedans.
Politics? How can you discuss the price of film without discussing inflation. That's economics. Also discussing how higher taxes has made discretionary money for film less available, also is an important issue regarding buying film. If you cannot discuss inflation and taxes, this whole thread is meaningless.
This thread is indeed meaningless.
I just bought some and it is fresh dated, and says Made in Japan.
The problem with that is 3 quarters and two dimes came out to 95 cents 30 years ago. Or 40 years ago. Or 50 years ago.
But today, March 22nd, 2023, if I take those same 3 quarters and two dimes, they are worth 95 cents.
And I'm not sure where you got the 95% silver from, because they are made primarily 85-90% of a copper/nickel alloy. The remainder being a copper filling.
MattKing
Moderator
Because you can discuss the price of film by saying it is due to inflation. The reasons behind the inflation are off topic for Photrio, imbued with politics and controversy, and discussion is against the rules.
At the time Tri-X was $0.95 the quarters/dimes were 95% silver. That is the point. At that time and today the amount of silver that 3@qtrs & 2@dimes (95% silver) represents buys a roll of Tri-X. But 3@qtrs & 2@dimes today (nickel/copper) do not. My experience (and I have researched this a bit) is the price of things in silver is fairly steady over time, while the price is dollars is not.
Gasilne- in 1964 one 95% silver quarter bought a gallon. Today- the silver value of one 95% silver quarter still buys a gallon, but $0,25 does not.
Many threads are full of controversy that go on for pages and pages.
Ah, but silence is golden, you see
That response deserves the platinum award. Mine deserves the palladium award
. Note that the current cost of metals is Palladium > Gold > Platinum > Silver...
You only have to think in 2018 I was able to buy C200 at roughly £3-£4 a cassette it is around a tenner £10) now (when you can get it) The inflation I would suggest is artificially increased by the scarcity of the item and the reduced use of film itself, which makes the unit cost more expensive to produce
Dear Alan Edward Klein, you are obvioisly allowed to talk about the level of inflation and the level of taxes here. It is also allowed to correlate the purchasing power in other
countries to film prices there - but from the point you talk about the reaons for it have you allready entered the minefield of politics.
But never mind Alan
?........
If Kodak was manufacturing 3.400.000 spools each day at it all time peak and their best selling film was more than a half of Kodak's film business in total.
Then Kodak produced around 2,5 billion films in 2001 - 2002.
It is around the half number of produced films worldwide I calculated some years ago. So this number is in a good near
of accuracy : ~ 4 billion films!
When I do film and wet plate photography rather than digital it's not based on cost. If that were the case I wouldn't do photography at all. I do it because I have fun.
Kent in SD
Kent in SD
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |