Why is the cost of film going up so fast?












15















Two years ago 25 sheets of Ilford Delta 100 4x5 B&W cost just over $25. My last purchase last fall it was ~$35. Now it's $46. That's a steep rise! What's driving these rising film prices and can we expect them to drop again some day?










share|improve this question

























  • I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

    – AJFaraday
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

    – J...
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

    – steel
    5 hours ago








  • 2





    Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

    – J...
    4 hours ago











  • @J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

    – Jim MacKenzie
    1 hour ago
















15















Two years ago 25 sheets of Ilford Delta 100 4x5 B&W cost just over $25. My last purchase last fall it was ~$35. Now it's $46. That's a steep rise! What's driving these rising film prices and can we expect them to drop again some day?










share|improve this question

























  • I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

    – AJFaraday
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

    – J...
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

    – steel
    5 hours ago








  • 2





    Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

    – J...
    4 hours ago











  • @J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

    – Jim MacKenzie
    1 hour ago














15












15








15


1






Two years ago 25 sheets of Ilford Delta 100 4x5 B&W cost just over $25. My last purchase last fall it was ~$35. Now it's $46. That's a steep rise! What's driving these rising film prices and can we expect them to drop again some day?










share|improve this question
















Two years ago 25 sheets of Ilford Delta 100 4x5 B&W cost just over $25. My last purchase last fall it was ~$35. Now it's $46. That's a steep rise! What's driving these rising film prices and can we expect them to drop again some day?







film black-and-white






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago







steel

















asked yesterday









steelsteel

711518




711518













  • I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

    – AJFaraday
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

    – J...
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

    – steel
    5 hours ago








  • 2





    Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

    – J...
    4 hours ago











  • @J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

    – Jim MacKenzie
    1 hour ago



















  • I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

    – AJFaraday
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

    – J...
    8 hours ago






  • 1





    @J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

    – steel
    5 hours ago








  • 2





    Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

    – J...
    4 hours ago











  • @J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

    – Jim MacKenzie
    1 hour ago

















I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

– AJFaraday
9 hours ago





I'd assume we're talking supply and demand here. Demand is dropping (fewer people want film now), the cost of mass producing 10 million units of film is not 1,000 times the cost of 10 thousand units of film. So higher costs per unit need to be covered by fewer sales. This equates to higher costs for the consumer.

– AJFaraday
9 hours ago




2




2





How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

– J...
8 hours ago





How can the rising cost of film possibly surprise anyone? Have you been living under a rock for the past twenty years?

– J...
8 hours ago




1




1





@J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

– steel
5 hours ago







@J... has it been doubling every two years for 20 years? Please read the entire question, your comment is less than helpful.

– steel
5 hours ago






2




2





Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

– J...
4 hours ago





Film camera sales effectively went to zero about ten years ago. Kodachrome died at the same time. Cinemas were the only major consumer of film left and, in the ten years between then and now, they've all switched to digital as well. Film manufacturers have been killing products for years, distributors have been selling the last scraps of discontinued stock... the writing has been on the wall for a long, long time.

– J...
4 hours ago













@J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

– Jim MacKenzie
1 hour ago





@J... Much cinematography is still done on film, particularly Indian "Bollywood" productions. The entire Bollywood industry is quite a bit larger than the US motion picture industry.

– Jim MacKenzie
1 hour ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















10














Here’s Fuji’s annual report: https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/integrated_report/ff_ir_2018_all.pdf



The page you want is page 48.



What you should notice is that photo imaging made up 15.7% of the business - to which photo imaging revenues were roughly 2/3. While imagine revenues have shown increases from 2014, they also appear to be plateauing from 2016 on.



Fuji directly credits emerging markets, instax, and printing for the growth - not provia, velvia, or astia. In case you missed the news, they’re retiring all B&W (https://petapixel.com/2018/04/06/fujifilm-officially-killing-off-acros-film/) [damn, I miss me some neopan 1600 about now].



Ilford is held by a private equities firm, so, there is no public data on their sales.



But, I would guess that Harman Tech was able to make it profitable, then it was acquired, and it’s positive profitability is why it still exists. They probably also declined in sales to the same plateau. The film resurgeance has been strongest with instant, followed by 135. 120 and larger are essentially being subsidized by these sales.



Prices will continue to climb until it makes more sense to nix the product altogether. Maybe they’ll still manufacture the plastic for us so we can make and coat our own large format emulsions in the future.






share|improve this answer































    27














    The sale price of film is going up because of “economy of scale”. In other words, the more you make of any particular article, the lower the cost to make that article. Digital imaging has overtaken film imaging and this movement continues at a rapid pace. Thus as film sales drop, the cost to manufacture goes up. It is as simple as that!






    share|improve this answer



















    • 9





      How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

      – Lightness Races in Orbit
      yesterday






    • 5





      Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

      – osullic
      yesterday






    • 5





      It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

      – Alan Marcus
      yesterday








    • 8





      @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

      – osullic
      19 hours ago








    • 2





      @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

      – user71659
      16 hours ago



















    3














    Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:




    • Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.

    • If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).


    If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 1





      European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

      – Jim MacKenzie
      1 hour ago



















    3














    In addition to economy of scale as mentioned, environmental protection obligations are certainly not becoming less - and it is called "chemical film" for a reason. There will certainly be some harmful chemical waste left after making film. Also, while exposed and developed film in household/commercial quantities might be considered normal bin-able household/commercial waste, the same might not be true for cutting scrap (eg where the holes have been punched) or discarded batches of unexposed film in industrial quantities.






    share|improve this answer
























    • This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

      – Hueco
      22 hours ago











    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "61"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104247%2fwhy-is-the-cost-of-film-going-up-so-fast%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    10














    Here’s Fuji’s annual report: https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/integrated_report/ff_ir_2018_all.pdf



    The page you want is page 48.



    What you should notice is that photo imaging made up 15.7% of the business - to which photo imaging revenues were roughly 2/3. While imagine revenues have shown increases from 2014, they also appear to be plateauing from 2016 on.



    Fuji directly credits emerging markets, instax, and printing for the growth - not provia, velvia, or astia. In case you missed the news, they’re retiring all B&W (https://petapixel.com/2018/04/06/fujifilm-officially-killing-off-acros-film/) [damn, I miss me some neopan 1600 about now].



    Ilford is held by a private equities firm, so, there is no public data on their sales.



    But, I would guess that Harman Tech was able to make it profitable, then it was acquired, and it’s positive profitability is why it still exists. They probably also declined in sales to the same plateau. The film resurgeance has been strongest with instant, followed by 135. 120 and larger are essentially being subsidized by these sales.



    Prices will continue to climb until it makes more sense to nix the product altogether. Maybe they’ll still manufacture the plastic for us so we can make and coat our own large format emulsions in the future.






    share|improve this answer




























      10














      Here’s Fuji’s annual report: https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/integrated_report/ff_ir_2018_all.pdf



      The page you want is page 48.



      What you should notice is that photo imaging made up 15.7% of the business - to which photo imaging revenues were roughly 2/3. While imagine revenues have shown increases from 2014, they also appear to be plateauing from 2016 on.



      Fuji directly credits emerging markets, instax, and printing for the growth - not provia, velvia, or astia. In case you missed the news, they’re retiring all B&W (https://petapixel.com/2018/04/06/fujifilm-officially-killing-off-acros-film/) [damn, I miss me some neopan 1600 about now].



      Ilford is held by a private equities firm, so, there is no public data on their sales.



      But, I would guess that Harman Tech was able to make it profitable, then it was acquired, and it’s positive profitability is why it still exists. They probably also declined in sales to the same plateau. The film resurgeance has been strongest with instant, followed by 135. 120 and larger are essentially being subsidized by these sales.



      Prices will continue to climb until it makes more sense to nix the product altogether. Maybe they’ll still manufacture the plastic for us so we can make and coat our own large format emulsions in the future.






      share|improve this answer


























        10












        10








        10







        Here’s Fuji’s annual report: https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/integrated_report/ff_ir_2018_all.pdf



        The page you want is page 48.



        What you should notice is that photo imaging made up 15.7% of the business - to which photo imaging revenues were roughly 2/3. While imagine revenues have shown increases from 2014, they also appear to be plateauing from 2016 on.



        Fuji directly credits emerging markets, instax, and printing for the growth - not provia, velvia, or astia. In case you missed the news, they’re retiring all B&W (https://petapixel.com/2018/04/06/fujifilm-officially-killing-off-acros-film/) [damn, I miss me some neopan 1600 about now].



        Ilford is held by a private equities firm, so, there is no public data on their sales.



        But, I would guess that Harman Tech was able to make it profitable, then it was acquired, and it’s positive profitability is why it still exists. They probably also declined in sales to the same plateau. The film resurgeance has been strongest with instant, followed by 135. 120 and larger are essentially being subsidized by these sales.



        Prices will continue to climb until it makes more sense to nix the product altogether. Maybe they’ll still manufacture the plastic for us so we can make and coat our own large format emulsions in the future.






        share|improve this answer













        Here’s Fuji’s annual report: https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/integrated_report/ff_ir_2018_all.pdf



        The page you want is page 48.



        What you should notice is that photo imaging made up 15.7% of the business - to which photo imaging revenues were roughly 2/3. While imagine revenues have shown increases from 2014, they also appear to be plateauing from 2016 on.



        Fuji directly credits emerging markets, instax, and printing for the growth - not provia, velvia, or astia. In case you missed the news, they’re retiring all B&W (https://petapixel.com/2018/04/06/fujifilm-officially-killing-off-acros-film/) [damn, I miss me some neopan 1600 about now].



        Ilford is held by a private equities firm, so, there is no public data on their sales.



        But, I would guess that Harman Tech was able to make it profitable, then it was acquired, and it’s positive profitability is why it still exists. They probably also declined in sales to the same plateau. The film resurgeance has been strongest with instant, followed by 135. 120 and larger are essentially being subsidized by these sales.



        Prices will continue to climb until it makes more sense to nix the product altogether. Maybe they’ll still manufacture the plastic for us so we can make and coat our own large format emulsions in the future.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered yesterday









        HuecoHueco

        11k32651




        11k32651

























            27














            The sale price of film is going up because of “economy of scale”. In other words, the more you make of any particular article, the lower the cost to make that article. Digital imaging has overtaken film imaging and this movement continues at a rapid pace. Thus as film sales drop, the cost to manufacture goes up. It is as simple as that!






            share|improve this answer



















            • 9





              How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              yesterday






            • 5





              Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

              – osullic
              yesterday






            • 5





              It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

              – Alan Marcus
              yesterday








            • 8





              @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

              – osullic
              19 hours ago








            • 2





              @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

              – user71659
              16 hours ago
















            27














            The sale price of film is going up because of “economy of scale”. In other words, the more you make of any particular article, the lower the cost to make that article. Digital imaging has overtaken film imaging and this movement continues at a rapid pace. Thus as film sales drop, the cost to manufacture goes up. It is as simple as that!






            share|improve this answer



















            • 9





              How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              yesterday






            • 5





              Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

              – osullic
              yesterday






            • 5





              It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

              – Alan Marcus
              yesterday








            • 8





              @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

              – osullic
              19 hours ago








            • 2





              @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

              – user71659
              16 hours ago














            27












            27








            27







            The sale price of film is going up because of “economy of scale”. In other words, the more you make of any particular article, the lower the cost to make that article. Digital imaging has overtaken film imaging and this movement continues at a rapid pace. Thus as film sales drop, the cost to manufacture goes up. It is as simple as that!






            share|improve this answer













            The sale price of film is going up because of “economy of scale”. In other words, the more you make of any particular article, the lower the cost to make that article. Digital imaging has overtaken film imaging and this movement continues at a rapid pace. Thus as film sales drop, the cost to manufacture goes up. It is as simple as that!







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Alan MarcusAlan Marcus

            24.9k13059




            24.9k13059








            • 9





              How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              yesterday






            • 5





              Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

              – osullic
              yesterday






            • 5





              It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

              – Alan Marcus
              yesterday








            • 8





              @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

              – osullic
              19 hours ago








            • 2





              @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

              – user71659
              16 hours ago














            • 9





              How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

              – Lightness Races in Orbit
              yesterday






            • 5





              Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

              – osullic
              yesterday






            • 5





              It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

              – Alan Marcus
              yesterday








            • 8





              @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

              – osullic
              19 hours ago








            • 2





              @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

              – user71659
              16 hours ago








            9




            9





            How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            yesterday





            How many "home users" certainly and even to a large degree professional photographers do you know who still use film? Is that quantity rising? I don't think so. I certainly agree there's a niche still for those that prefer it, but I think it's a tough sell to claim that film is clawing back any of the digital market. Digital photography is completely pervasive now.

            – Lightness Races in Orbit
            yesterday




            5




            5





            Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

            – osullic
            yesterday





            Nobody is under any false illusion that film is going to make a comeback and take over digital. But yes certainly home users are showing increased interest in film photography...alongside digital, and maybe especially from people who never tried film photography before. Kodak Alaris re-introduced Ektachrome. Ilford started making their Titan 4X5 pinhole camera. There were 8 questions asked on photo.stackexchange.com so far today - 3 of which are about film. 37.5% is pretty good going for film in my book! Is the quantity of film users rising since, say, 2015... I do think so.

            – osullic
            yesterday




            5




            5





            It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

            – Alan Marcus
            yesterday







            It was amateur film sales that ruled the market and these sales subsidized the professional film market. Without the amateur sales subsidization professional film making is on a downward spiral.

            – Alan Marcus
            yesterday






            8




            8





            @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

            – osullic
            19 hours ago







            @IMiL I'm not stupid, I know that 1/3 people don't use film. My point is just that this argument that people are switching from film to digital is flawed. That switch is long finished. There are no more hold-outs giving up film for digital in 2019. The question talks about film prices in the last 2 years. Film use bottomed out years before that. But now, it seems to me, there is renewed interest in film, as I already mentioned. I would guess there are more people shooting film in 2019 than 2016 or 2017.

            – osullic
            19 hours ago






            2




            2





            @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

            – user71659
            16 hours ago





            @osullic You're thinking about still photography. You forgot cinema. That changeover was later, and there's still cinemas today who haven't switched to digital projection, especially in foreign countries. One roll of 135 film is equal to 3 seconds of cinema footage, times the hours per film times the thousands of prints made for each of the hundreds of movie releases per year.

            – user71659
            16 hours ago











            3














            Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:




            • Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.

            • If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).


            If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1





              European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

              – Jim MacKenzie
              1 hour ago
















            3














            Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:




            • Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.

            • If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).


            If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1





              European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

              – Jim MacKenzie
              1 hour ago














            3












            3








            3







            Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:




            • Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.

            • If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).


            If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.






            share|improve this answer













            Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:




            • Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.

            • If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).


            If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            jarnbjojarnbjo

            1,25169




            1,25169








            • 1





              European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

              – Jim MacKenzie
              1 hour ago














            • 1





              European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

              – Jim MacKenzie
              1 hour ago








            1




            1





            European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

            – Jim MacKenzie
            1 hour ago





            European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.

            – Jim MacKenzie
            1 hour ago











            3














            In addition to economy of scale as mentioned, environmental protection obligations are certainly not becoming less - and it is called "chemical film" for a reason. There will certainly be some harmful chemical waste left after making film. Also, while exposed and developed film in household/commercial quantities might be considered normal bin-able household/commercial waste, the same might not be true for cutting scrap (eg where the holes have been punched) or discarded batches of unexposed film in industrial quantities.






            share|improve this answer
























            • This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

              – Hueco
              22 hours ago
















            3














            In addition to economy of scale as mentioned, environmental protection obligations are certainly not becoming less - and it is called "chemical film" for a reason. There will certainly be some harmful chemical waste left after making film. Also, while exposed and developed film in household/commercial quantities might be considered normal bin-able household/commercial waste, the same might not be true for cutting scrap (eg where the holes have been punched) or discarded batches of unexposed film in industrial quantities.






            share|improve this answer
























            • This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

              – Hueco
              22 hours ago














            3












            3








            3







            In addition to economy of scale as mentioned, environmental protection obligations are certainly not becoming less - and it is called "chemical film" for a reason. There will certainly be some harmful chemical waste left after making film. Also, while exposed and developed film in household/commercial quantities might be considered normal bin-able household/commercial waste, the same might not be true for cutting scrap (eg where the holes have been punched) or discarded batches of unexposed film in industrial quantities.






            share|improve this answer













            In addition to economy of scale as mentioned, environmental protection obligations are certainly not becoming less - and it is called "chemical film" for a reason. There will certainly be some harmful chemical waste left after making film. Also, while exposed and developed film in household/commercial quantities might be considered normal bin-able household/commercial waste, the same might not be true for cutting scrap (eg where the holes have been punched) or discarded batches of unexposed film in industrial quantities.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            rackandbonemanrackandboneman

            1,289312




            1,289312













            • This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

              – Hueco
              22 hours ago



















            • This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

              – Hueco
              22 hours ago

















            This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

            – Hueco
            22 hours ago





            This is a good point. It's illegal in my local area to dump used fixer down the drain as the silver is bad for the environment. There are local resources, however, that will take the exhausted fix off your hands to extract out the silver.

            – Hueco
            22 hours ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104247%2fwhy-is-the-cost-of-film-going-up-so-fast%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Polycentropodidae

            Magento 2 Error message: Invalid state change requested

            Paulmy