iridium7777
Established
so i left my film rangefinder about 4 years ago, being 100% film shooter prior to that.
it's crazy that Leica film RF prices stayed the same and I was looking at second hand M6s and MPs out of curiosity... and then I started looking at film developing and scanning prices
Seems like most Walgreens where i used to do quick develop/scan only for about $4.99 no longer even have film machines.
I've found a few specific Film developing places but their prices now range from 10$/roll to develop/scan for lowest resolution to 20$/roll develop and scan for resolution for 8x10.
And then I've looked at prices of film... my beloved Fuji either does not exist anymore or the prices are about 10$ roll of slide and at minimum $5 per roll for color film.
at these costs it'll run me about 15$-20$ per roll to shoot film. I looked through my old photo journal and i did about 50 rolls per year, so that's $1000 per year and probably things are going to keep getting more difficult and pricier.
is film becoming more of a nostalgic side hobby that's only sustainable on the side, or those that do majority of film now develop and scan their own to keep the costs down? seems like mainstream options are dwindling...
it's crazy that Leica film RF prices stayed the same and I was looking at second hand M6s and MPs out of curiosity... and then I started looking at film developing and scanning prices
Seems like most Walgreens where i used to do quick develop/scan only for about $4.99 no longer even have film machines.
I've found a few specific Film developing places but their prices now range from 10$/roll to develop/scan for lowest resolution to 20$/roll develop and scan for resolution for 8x10.
And then I've looked at prices of film... my beloved Fuji either does not exist anymore or the prices are about 10$ roll of slide and at minimum $5 per roll for color film.
at these costs it'll run me about 15$-20$ per roll to shoot film. I looked through my old photo journal and i did about 50 rolls per year, so that's $1000 per year and probably things are going to keep getting more difficult and pricier.
is film becoming more of a nostalgic side hobby that's only sustainable on the side, or those that do majority of film now develop and scan their own to keep the costs down? seems like mainstream options are dwindling...
rscheffler
Well-known
What do you shoot now? Mostly digital?
IMO, the cost of film and processing reflects the reality of the market. The number of users is a minuscule fraction of what it used to be, therefore it's unrealistic to expect the 'cheap' options that used to exist, based very much on high volume and low margins, will continue to exist. For example it looks like Fujifilm is doing its best to let everyone know it wants out of the film market (except maybe its Instax film segment) by constantly cutting product from its film catalog. Manufacturing and developing film in small runs is costly in respect to time and resources, especially if the infrastructure was designed for high volumes. The market has been and is continuing to shift to small scale production which is somewhat less efficient, but should at least be more sustainable. Combined with fewer users spread around the world, it's only to be expected that prices will go up.
That said, I believe there are still options available to save yourself some money, though at less of a convenience for yourself. Yes, it involves home processing and scanning. Keep in mind, what you may save in material costs, likely will be lost in time commitment. How long will it take you to process and scan a roll of film? $20 might still be worth spending to free up some of your time.
$1000/year is also still less than buying a full frame digital Leica.
IMO, the cost of film and processing reflects the reality of the market. The number of users is a minuscule fraction of what it used to be, therefore it's unrealistic to expect the 'cheap' options that used to exist, based very much on high volume and low margins, will continue to exist. For example it looks like Fujifilm is doing its best to let everyone know it wants out of the film market (except maybe its Instax film segment) by constantly cutting product from its film catalog. Manufacturing and developing film in small runs is costly in respect to time and resources, especially if the infrastructure was designed for high volumes. The market has been and is continuing to shift to small scale production which is somewhat less efficient, but should at least be more sustainable. Combined with fewer users spread around the world, it's only to be expected that prices will go up.
That said, I believe there are still options available to save yourself some money, though at less of a convenience for yourself. Yes, it involves home processing and scanning. Keep in mind, what you may save in material costs, likely will be lost in time commitment. How long will it take you to process and scan a roll of film? $20 might still be worth spending to free up some of your time.
$1000/year is also still less than buying a full frame digital Leica.
iridium7777
Established
yes, for the last 4 years i've been fully digital and printing at home.
like you say, the realities of shrinking market are now seemingly obvious to me, simply checking by how much the landscape changed in the last 4 years.
i also agree about the time vs. cost proposition, i personally have no interest in doing my own development (never did it before) and investing in scanner options and scanning film myself. 4 years ago reading on the forums here the scanner options were drying up, i couldn't imagine what it would be like today, i imagine you almost have to maintain a separate obsolete, by now in terms of OS, computer just to keep some of the options running.
$1000/yr may not be bad, but i still think it exceeds most digital camera depreciation rates, even for digital leica.
also, looking at the leica MP values which stayed the same, $3K+ it still seems crazy to me that film cameras can commend such prices.
like you say, the realities of shrinking market are now seemingly obvious to me, simply checking by how much the landscape changed in the last 4 years.
i also agree about the time vs. cost proposition, i personally have no interest in doing my own development (never did it before) and investing in scanner options and scanning film myself. 4 years ago reading on the forums here the scanner options were drying up, i couldn't imagine what it would be like today, i imagine you almost have to maintain a separate obsolete, by now in terms of OS, computer just to keep some of the options running.
$1000/yr may not be bad, but i still think it exceeds most digital camera depreciation rates, even for digital leica.
also, looking at the leica MP values which stayed the same, $3K+ it still seems crazy to me that film cameras can commend such prices.
dmc
Bessa Driver
How can I afford the cost of film processing? First off, I shoot 100% B&W. If I were a coulor shooter, my answer would be much different. Heck, even when I do shoot digital I convert the shots to B&W in Lightroom using film emulation plug-ins!
So, for B&W film photography, there are many great films available at very reasonable prices. Check Freestyle, B & H, and even JCH (Japan Camera Hunter) for great deals on film. I then process my own film at home, buying chemicals in bulk and using them until they are exhausted. Once processed you have a choice; scan them and print on your ink-jet printer (I don't find that economical) or you can print in your home darkroom. In any case you can scan the results if you want an electronic file.
Home darkrooms need not be expensive, and once purchased will last a lifetime. Besides, it's a blast!
Why bother with all this? While many will say the new 36 Mp cameras will surpass film in quality, they are making a digital file. 0's and 1's. There is no depth to these perfect files. With film you are making an analog image, which is imperfect. That's what makes it perfect.
Just try it. Not at Walmart, but in your own home. Start with a film changing bag, and some small quantities of chemicals. You may just end up liking it.
So, for B&W film photography, there are many great films available at very reasonable prices. Check Freestyle, B & H, and even JCH (Japan Camera Hunter) for great deals on film. I then process my own film at home, buying chemicals in bulk and using them until they are exhausted. Once processed you have a choice; scan them and print on your ink-jet printer (I don't find that economical) or you can print in your home darkroom. In any case you can scan the results if you want an electronic file.
Home darkrooms need not be expensive, and once purchased will last a lifetime. Besides, it's a blast!
Why bother with all this? While many will say the new 36 Mp cameras will surpass film in quality, they are making a digital file. 0's and 1's. There is no depth to these perfect files. With film you are making an analog image, which is imperfect. That's what makes it perfect.
Just try it. Not at Walmart, but in your own home. Start with a film changing bag, and some small quantities of chemicals. You may just end up liking it.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
How did you afford it in the past? There was a increasing drop in film prices during the past twenty years, as it got into pressure from digital, but before that, film was at least as expensive as today...
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I think film is cheaper these days and processing not much dearer and it includes a scan on a CD.
Not much dearer means an eight pound deal (25 years) now costs me nine pounds. But that compares a 2 day lab with a 1 hour service and it's from memory...
Regards, David
I think film is cheaper these days and processing not much dearer and it includes a scan on a CD.
Not much dearer means an eight pound deal (25 years) now costs me nine pounds. But that compares a 2 day lab with a 1 hour service and it's from memory...
Regards, David
Dayrell bishop
Well-known
Same as Helenhill.
dmc
Bessa Driver
Well, I've always processed my own film in my home darkroom, starting in the mid-sixties. I have never found film or processing to be onerously expensive. But I don't smoke either, maybe that's why I can afford film! lol
iridium7777
Established
maybe i'm not that old, i started doing film photography in '07, i'd say seriously or at least more frequently.
as i said, back then i could buy a plethora of fuji's film selections, in bulk, that would keep the cost to around 2-3$ per roll, now these either don't exist or cost 5-6$ a roll.
i could develop and scan at walgreens, costco or target for something like $4.99 for low res, now my options are 10$ for the same.
slide film was perhaps the most expensive, but i still don't think i paid more than 6$ per roll, now they seem to be $10+ per roll. i used to buy these pre-paid enveloped from either B&H in like a 10+ pack where fuji would develop the film and i think it was around 5$? i don't even know what or whom would do slide development for me now.
i never shot B&W, and reading through the comments that's the most affordable solution, but for what i did it seems that color options easily doubled in price and have become less available
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
10 bucks per roll is adjusted to inflation price. At film days of OP, one pint of beer was one dollar, now it is close to ten.
And if you never learned how to DIY, it was always expensive. At home we switched to digital for family pictures in 2007 because roll film was expensive to buy and process at the Walmart lab.
I switched to cinema film as color film. It is something like $40 or less per 100'. Processable at home in ECN-2 and C-41 kits. Also not very expensive.
Fuji 250D at ECN-2 kit at home.
BW film is cheap and plenty.
And if you never learned how to DIY, it was always expensive. At home we switched to digital for family pictures in 2007 because roll film was expensive to buy and process at the Walmart lab.
I switched to cinema film as color film. It is something like $40 or less per 100'. Processable at home in ECN-2 and C-41 kits. Also not very expensive.
Fuji 250D at ECN-2 kit at home.
BW film is cheap and plenty.
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
I wouldn't be shooting as much film as I do if I wasn't mostly B&W and able to do DIY scanning and dev.
I haven't done any color dev at home but that's the next step. I figure I've scanned enough with my $100 Canon Canoscan 9000F that it's down to .30c/roll and dropping, my HC110 developer costs are near nothing, fixer is similarly cheap and I don't have too many walls to hang images on so if I print something, it's being sold for a profit.
I haven't done any color dev at home but that's the next step. I figure I've scanned enough with my $100 Canon Canoscan 9000F that it's down to .30c/roll and dropping, my HC110 developer costs are near nothing, fixer is similarly cheap and I don't have too many walls to hang images on so if I print something, it's being sold for a profit.
BLKRCAT
75% Film
Sigh... Not a solution... I've posted numerous times about this.
Cheap for you but taking money away from Alaris. If everyone moved to cinema films demand for portra and ektar would drop. Prices would increase further and eventually we will see the emulsion dropped. Support your still films in production.
I keep costs down by shooting mostly BW. I process and scan my own like most people here. I'm also a very selective shooter so a roll lasts me quite some time. I think this is key to saving money.
OP, you are looking at the most expensive options out there. I don't buy fuji film anymore because it's far too expensive. There are wonderful replacements for Fuji, Kodak being one of them.
CSG123
Established
I haven't shot color film since Costco stopped processing it. I moved to digital for almost all my photography. However, I have some fine 35mm cameras and I shoot B&W only with them. I develop it myself at the local college darkroom and scan it on my Epson V700. I haven't made a darkroom print in 30 years or more.
I love film as it's what I grew up with but I love digital far more so 10 rolls of B&W in a year would be a lot for me. Film is now an anachronism but it has it's place and is worth the small cost IMO. My 1966-7 Leica M4 is about 50 years old and shoots as well today as it did when it was new. Think we'll ever be able to say that about a digital camera?
I love film as it's what I grew up with but I love digital far more so 10 rolls of B&W in a year would be a lot for me. Film is now an anachronism but it has it's place and is worth the small cost IMO. My 1966-7 Leica M4 is about 50 years old and shoots as well today as it did when it was new. Think we'll ever be able to say that about a digital camera?
Addy101
Well-known
These days you don't use film because it is "cheap" or "convenient" but because you either like the look or the experience. You either think it is worth the cost or it isn't. It seems it isn't for you.....
Your going at this completely wrong - one could as easily ask "how can you afford a digital rangefinder", a mirrorless is much cheaper - or "how can you afford a mirrorless camera", just use your phone.
I pay €5,- to get my 120 developed, that is much, much cheaper then buying a digital MF camera for the few times I use MF....
Your going at this completely wrong - one could as easily ask "how can you afford a digital rangefinder", a mirrorless is much cheaper - or "how can you afford a mirrorless camera", just use your phone.
I pay €5,- to get my 120 developed, that is much, much cheaper then buying a digital MF camera for the few times I use MF....
kshapero
South Florida Man
I would rather pay $11 to develop a roll of film then pay that much to see a crap movie. Just saying.
TobiasL
Member
I pay $18 per roll including developing, scanning I do myself. That's far from cheap in my opinion but I shoot film because it's fun, not because it's cheap. I looked at what it would cost to bulk load my film as I've heard it's cheaper, the difference was $1 dollar per roll. Not really worth it but it might depend on what film you use.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I like rangefinders and I like bw street photography. The cheapest digital Leica RF is $1000 and it is not 135 format. It can't give me ISO3200, while I could easily get it from HP5+ film.
I have working M4-2, paid $650 for it couple of years ago. CLA is what? $200 every ten years?
How much is repair cost for Monochrome with corrosive sensor gamble at $3000 cost for used camera?
And you are telling me what film is expensive, while for $50 I have 100' roll of HP5+ from September to March for everything I want, no self-limiting, lots of prints made with BW IQ better what any digital camera and availability to print under enlarger at the countertop in the basement, no real darkroom. You have to buy enlarger only once, it is not unsupported absolute after five years and it costs next to nothing these days.
I have working M4-2, paid $650 for it couple of years ago. CLA is what? $200 every ten years?
How much is repair cost for Monochrome with corrosive sensor gamble at $3000 cost for used camera?
And you are telling me what film is expensive, while for $50 I have 100' roll of HP5+ from September to March for everything I want, no self-limiting, lots of prints made with BW IQ better what any digital camera and availability to print under enlarger at the countertop in the basement, no real darkroom. You have to buy enlarger only once, it is not unsupported absolute after five years and it costs next to nothing these days.
taskoni
Well-known
how can you afford film anymore?
I process myself, print the contact sheets and control prints in my lab (24x30 till 40x50cm) and I also work with a darkroom technician who prints my exhibitions and prints for sale. Tip to afford film - shell out big time once to fill your fridge till the top and time to time buy a brick or two... If you are not shooting 400-800 rolls per year you will find out that film is cheap. I scan small control prints, almost never the negatives so and I don't need fancy film scanner. I would rather ask how one affords silver bromide paper anymore as there is where it gets ugly
Regards,
Boris
I process myself, print the contact sheets and control prints in my lab (24x30 till 40x50cm) and I also work with a darkroom technician who prints my exhibitions and prints for sale. Tip to afford film - shell out big time once to fill your fridge till the top and time to time buy a brick or two... If you are not shooting 400-800 rolls per year you will find out that film is cheap. I scan small control prints, almost never the negatives so and I don't need fancy film scanner. I would rather ask how one affords silver bromide paper anymore as there is where it gets ugly
Regards,
Boris
iridium7777
Established
thanks for your replies
thanks for your replies
i guess if you're looking at it from B&W perspective and do your own development then yeah.
i think i've shot 1 roll of B&W and i never developed because run of the mill labs wouldn't do it, so i was 100% color shooter and would be coming back to color only.
with regards to using kodak vs fuji on a 20$ process i may be saving $1-2, at most, so not that much of a difference.
I did find a local university/"photography center" where for $35/mo you get access to all their development, scanning, editing and printing equipment. i have no interest in doing my own color development but that would cap my cost of a roll of film + development to maybe under $10 and the remainder i can do at this place. a few bills a year cheaper, i guess if i shoot even more rolls then it'll pay off.
thanks for your replies
i guess if you're looking at it from B&W perspective and do your own development then yeah.
i think i've shot 1 roll of B&W and i never developed because run of the mill labs wouldn't do it, so i was 100% color shooter and would be coming back to color only.
with regards to using kodak vs fuji on a 20$ process i may be saving $1-2, at most, so not that much of a difference.
I did find a local university/"photography center" where for $35/mo you get access to all their development, scanning, editing and printing equipment. i have no interest in doing my own color development but that would cap my cost of a roll of film + development to maybe under $10 and the remainder i can do at this place. a few bills a year cheaper, i guess if i shoot even more rolls then it'll pay off.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Film prices have remained constant, pretty much since the 1930s. A couple years ago I looked at prices in magazines and accounting for inflation, film prices are almost about what they've always been.
That said, in 35mm I mostly shoot slides. I get Agfa Precisa which is a few cents over $10 a roll locally, vs. Fuji branded films which start at $14+ I don't scan every roll I process since I don't feel the need to show off everything I make. But I also only shoot about 1 roll a month.
In 120 I buy 5 packs of C41 film, and mostly shoot 645. These I always scan (unless I suspect the roll was ruined or contains nothing of interest). I usually go through about 2 rolls a month. Not a big deal.
Digital, I do if I expect to shoot lots of photos, for instance when taking a trip. Otherwise I only ever take the DSLR out if I know I'm out of film.
That said, in 35mm I mostly shoot slides. I get Agfa Precisa which is a few cents over $10 a roll locally, vs. Fuji branded films which start at $14+ I don't scan every roll I process since I don't feel the need to show off everything I make. But I also only shoot about 1 roll a month.
In 120 I buy 5 packs of C41 film, and mostly shoot 645. These I always scan (unless I suspect the roll was ruined or contains nothing of interest). I usually go through about 2 rolls a month. Not a big deal.
Digital, I do if I expect to shoot lots of photos, for instance when taking a trip. Otherwise I only ever take the DSLR out if I know I'm out of film.