• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

thoughts on the announced Kodak film price increase?

Latest Gallery

In The Subway 3.jpg

H
In The Subway 3.jpg

  • 0
  • 0
  • 10
Continental Divide Watershed

H
Continental Divide Watershed

  • 3
  • 1
  • 39

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
203,598
Messages
2,856,920
Members
101,918
Latest member
roncrazynurse
Recent bookmarks
0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lachlan Young said:
That's wishful thinking that ignores the photochemical reality of ECN-2. Orwo/Inoviscoat are already able to make C-41 (CD-4) compatible materials, and by getting ECN-2 (CD-3) on the market it opens up both their ability to make other CD-3 based materials (E-6) & possibly also the last critical steps to making a 'good' C-41 as opposed to the incremental steps that have been turned into various Lomo products. And you'll need to reposition your thinking as to price - it's far more likely to be closely competitive with Kodak than significantly cheaper - Kodak have major institutional making/ coating advantages (e.g. can coat in a single pass through 2 coating stations, driers etc - the Inoviscoat setup requires a double pass through the machine to deliver the same number of layers).
Click to expand...

You are ignoring the reality of Kodak. It is Kodak the one which suffers having machinery that is suited to a scale far bigger than the current film demand. Inoviscoat has been created recently and they are focused on a smaller scale of production which should be more cost effective for today's production volumes. Add to this equation Kodak's well-established disasterous management, marketing, etc...

I can bet Inoviscoat are more cost efficient in their production.
 
MattKing said:
No it is Eastman Kodak, although I don't know if Eastman Kodak has anyone else assisting them with this through contract.
See here: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/photographers/film
The most common sizes are regular catalogue items, and are listed on the 2021 Pro Film List here: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/film/2021_Pro_Film_Catalog_List.pdf
The special order size orders are placed and coordinated through KB Canham Cameras - see here for the list of special order sizes that have catalogue numbers: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/film/2021_Pro_Film_Special-Order.pdf
If you have huge amounts of money, apparently they will make other sizes too.
Click to expand...
Maybe we can get Tesla to order up 100 million rolls of 220.:smile:
 
jnantz said:
Prices go up, that is reality .. 20% this year. 5% 5 years ago doesn't really matter"

Im always amazed how people in this day and age, with the market shrinking as it is, and everything from materials to transport have skyrocketed in price can complain
about the cost of film when we are lucky to even have it.
Click to expand...

Film market hasn't been shrinking at all, to say the least.
 
I haven't been able to afford TMY in sheet film for ages now. I do pick up the odd 120 rolls though. Thankfully, I'm more into Ilford's and Rollei's films.
 
I love TMY-2 in 120. Ilford offerings as well. But TMY and XTOL have been my regular load forever.
 
(Moderator's Note - two related threads merged into thread in Industry News)

didnt see a post about it here, unless I missed it. third time in 3 years. I know a lot of products have increased in price during the pandemic, but is this now going to be a yearly occurrence? time to make a larger purchase than usual before jan 2022? a 50% increase in tmax 100, really?
 

Attachments

  • Kodak_FC_Pricing_1st_Jan_2022.pdf
    114.3 KB · Views: 413
Last edited by a moderator:
John Bragg said:
It is a sad fact that world digitization hasn't killed Tri-X, but Kodak's crazy pricing policies just might. One time not all that long ago, I only used Tri-X. Now it is HP5+ all the way for me.
Click to expand...
I used to be a mostly Kodak shooter, because their prices were competitive, if not cheaper than the competition and their quality top notch. Something like 90% of what I shot. Nowadays, I simply don't buy any Kodak film. I have some in the freezer and still shoot some colour Kodak film, but I'm not inclined to buy any. TMY2 was my favourite bw film, still is actually, but at these prices I'll just pass. Ilford takes my money, they seem to be able to sell at a lower price point and their quality is also excellent. Yes, Kodak may do as they please and sell at whatever price they see fit. They're a business, not a charity. But they've become a little too expensive lately IMHO.
 
They’re pricing out casual shooters. Like it or not, it is the mainstream popularity of film with casual shooters which is the reason the “analog resurgence” exists. Without the popularity, the resurgence is dead.

If the prices were like this around 2013 I might not have started with film at all.
 
Here's the price increase in TMax 100 v TMax400 as listed in the doc destroya provided: 8572273 KODAK T-MAX B&W 100 120 FILM (5 PACK) 52%
8568214 KODAK T-MAX B&W 400 120 FILM (5 PACK) 16%

There has to be a mistake surely? There is almost no difference in the same films in 135. So how can TMax 120 justify 52% when its 400 brother is only 16%?

Boy, if this isn't a typo I'd really like to see the reasons. Mind you if this difference is so obvious which it is, then all I can conclude is that if it was a mistake then Kodak would have noticed it as well so odds are that it is not a mistake but deliberate

An ambulance has been despatched to Ilford's boardroom at Mobberley where the directors have been celebrating so long that they are all dangerously ill with alcoholic poisoning:smile:

pentaxuser
 
I will wait for the official announcement and then run around buying up all the old stock to keep it out of the hands of the hoarders.
 
I think it’s called ‘inflation’ and isn’t limited to just film.
 
the price hasn't really gone up that much, and it has been a regular occurrence since, forever. expired film is expensive too, in some cases as expensive as fresh film.
 
I use the best film that produces the results I want. If I have to cut something, it will be unrelated to photography. Life is full of choices some of them are hard, but we are free to make our own choices.
 
Ah so the price rises listed especially the 52% for 120 TMax 100 doesn't sound like a problem? It was to be expected and we must learn to live with it. It's inflation. Well that's certainly the right word but this level of inflation seems to be particularly affecting film and Kodak in particular and not general price inflation. So any ideas why inflation should reach this level for film especially TMax 100 in 120 format?

pentaxuser
 
Well, the tmax 100 just is an anomaly. Most of the rest are in the 20% ballpark with a few at 32% or 29%. So, it seems there is probably a different explanation for that one. Of the rest, a few seem significant, but they’re probably dealing with an increase of raw materials prices. The lower ones are in the ballpark of what I’d expect for an annual inflation bump.
 
Old Gregg said:
So even if we go up to $20, it wouldn't be too different. Ask yourself if there's a better way to spend $20.
Click to expand...
I imagine it is related to your income level and how many rolls you shoot a month. If prices go up 20% do your film purchases go down 20%? Does anyone know whether film processing prices have gone up too?
 
Last edited:
John Bragg said:
It is a sad fact that world digitization hasn't killed Tri-X, but Kodak's crazy pricing policies just might. One time not all that long ago, I only used Tri-X. Now it is HP5+ all the way for me.
Click to expand...
I'm heading in that direction as well. I recently tried a couple of rolls of HP5+ in 35mm and really liked the results.
 
@flavio81 Kodak's coating is about as scalable today as Ilford's is - if they need it to be. The bottleneck is the amount of conversion capacity they have - and current demand is much greater than Kodak can fulfill for a number of products - but profit margins need to be higher for investment against future demand, emulsion R&D etc in a sustainable manner. Kodak have clearly decided that there is not any worth in chasing the (whinging) amateur bargain basement market. Inoviscoat is not cheaper in any aspect of production than Kodak - overall, they might be more expensive because they will have bottlenecks from coating availability - and the cinema materials choice may owe as much to Orwo having suitable conversion capability, rather than having to rely on a third party conversion partner.

@Ian Grant 8x10 TXP320 only returned to the Kodak catalogue as a stock item this year (which says it's selling well enough for this change). 8x10 Tmax 400 is a non-stock special order item with a significant MOQ. All non-4x5 Kodak sheet films require multiple packaging operations - I'm not sure how automated Ilford's standard sheet format packaging is, but this may play a significant part in the price differences, as does 2 generations of unthinking lecturers in this country instructing/ dictating that B&W sheet film is FP4/ FP4+ and nothing else (or at least that seems to be what the students hear). I think there is a tendency to ignore the cultural legacy of the former Kodak Ltd's often different (to EK) range of materials (and/ or what they chose to import/ stock) and the impact that had on what previous generations would recommend to succeeding generations. If Foma upgraded their films to be fully competitive with Kodak/ Ilford etc, they wouldn't realistically have any price advantage.

@Old Gregg People don't like to be reminded about how much the vast demand for cheap consumer colour neg in the 1990s effectively subsidised a price freeze on professional materials - and just how huge (and brutally competitive) that consumer market was. Wait till they discover how expensive various top-end art materials from other disciplines are.
 
T-Max 100 sheet film is OK (relatively speaking) I suspect that the amazing qualities of T-Max 400 (TMY-2) especially in a 120 sized negative, makes TMX some what redundant.
 
John Bragg said:
It is a sad fact that world digitization hasn't killed Tri-X...
Click to expand...
Those of us who've been turned off by its grain and lack of sharpness since, oh, the 1960s, agree with that sentiment. Yes, I quoted you out of context and perverted your meaning, but couldn't resist. Sorry. :smile:

Of all the films Eastman Kodak manufactures today, TRI-X sells best and will be last to go, despite price increases.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
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:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom