I knew the price hike was coming and I accept it as necessary. In smaller formats it's not sooo bad. Film at least in the quantities that I shoot it is affordable for me. And I shoot everything on film.
The exception to this is 8x10 film. According to Freestyle Portra 400 is listed at $248, and with an instant rebate $224, for 10 measly sheets. Sure it's a different base with a different economy of scale but a roll of 35mm at 36exp is slightly less than $11 per roll, and slightly less than $50 for 5. Scaling that up to 10 is just under $100 of course, and that comes with little plastic cases, a metal cartridge, and sprocket holes. 8x10 sheet film has a different base, but it just comes in a nice cardboard box. So how is it more than double the price?
At it's current price, Portra 400 is more than color Polaroid 8x10 film...by a lot! I really don't understand what is happening here. I get that the economy of scale is very different, but this is a little outrageous.
Portra 160 is mercefully currently at $188. Fuji Provia is $300, but you get 20 sheets. So $150 for 10, and since when is chrome cheaper than color neg?
Just ranting a bit here. I love 8x10 but at this price, 4x5 and 5x7 will have to do. I can't imagine how ULF shooters are dealing with this.
In other words a price correction to bring it in line with the rest of the world...
8x10 colour has always been relatively disproportionately expensive, that it was relatively cheap for a while had more to do with it being effectively subsidised by highly profitable amateur market films. It's also exponentially less used than smaller formats and was almost always a high end professional/ commercial/ artist/ very well-heeled-amateur format. Check out the price of some handmade/ mouldmade printmaking or watercolour papers if you want some real sticker shock.
I'm not sure how it can be "in line with the rest of the world" when the price doesn't even correspond to the same stock in different formats, or even Provia from Fuji. 8x10 Portra 400 is listed as about $50 more expensive than 4x5 Portra 400 by surface area conversion. There is just a huge mark up. Again even Polaroid "Originals" color instant film is significantly less expensive and that stuff develops itself!
sometimes freestyle has LF as short date film, i used to get out of date 8x10 fuji chrome film from them, it was a bit more affordable than selling a kidney. i think stonenyc used to shoot a ton of 8x10 ( and 14x17? ) chrome film that was fresh from japan. he was distributing it so maybe he was able to make a little profit so it was more affordable for him in the end? i think it was $35-40/pop just for processing. i gave up and just developed mine in print developer and coffee as stained dye cloud black and white.Just ranting a bit here. I love 8x10 but at this price, 4x5 and 5x7 will have to do. I can't imagine how ULF shooters are dealing with this.
I have never been able to afford color film for my 8x10. LFers and ULFers are by necessity, mostly well-off older men.
There may be some solace in the fact that eventually you will definitely meet the second of your 2 qualifications aboveIf it is any consolation I am writing this post in the Accident and Emergency department of my local hospital. I started to shake my head at these prices and eventually got to the stage where the shake's orbit got large enough that my head spun 360 degrees.
pentaxuser
So how is it more than double the price?
Drew, 8x10 film is four times the size of 4x5 film.Wrong Alan. 8x10 color film with processing is now averages about $30 per shot. That's triple your 4x5 Velvia per shot with processing. I'm still shooting 8x10 color , but now far less often than smaller formats. I've already got plenty of older 8x10 chromes and color negs to print from.
I do get that 8x10 is expensive generally but at some point it's just unaffordable. Over $200 per box of 10 sheets is probably at that point. It just becomes kind of a dumb show-offy medium that can really only be practiced when sponsored by a well-to-do backer after that point. I am probably in a minority here in that I generally trust Kodak when they say they need to price something a certain way. But in regards to 8x10 it just seems like something has broken down.
Comparing Foma b&w film to Kodak color sheet film, or even their own black and white products, is irrelevant because there is such a significant difference in quality. The more sheet film does in fact get seriously expensive, the more sheer quality becomes an asset. Each shot has to count. With Foma b&w, I found myself duplicating shots because I could never really trust the sheets to be blemish free; and therefore cheaper film proved actually more expensive to use in the long run, plus a lot more hassle. If one follows the plastics industry, decreasing demand does indeed make special estar base material inherently more expensive, but certain plastics in general have gone way way up over the past couple decades.
It's called inflation, and it's not going away.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?