Why is the cost of film going up so fast?
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
|
show 3 more comments
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
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
|
show 3 more comments
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
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
film black-and-white
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
|
show 3 more comments
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
|
show 3 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
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.
add a comment |
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!
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
|
show 10 more comments
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
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.
answered yesterday
HuecoHueco
11k32651
11k32651
add a comment |
add a comment |
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!
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
|
show 10 more comments
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!
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
|
show 10 more comments
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!
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!
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
|
show 10 more comments
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
|
show 10 more comments
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$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.
1
European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.
– Jim MacKenzie
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:
- Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.
- If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).
If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.
1
European prices are quite a bit higher than US prices because VAT is included. UK prices include VAT too but shipping and warehousing aren't major concerns, since Ilford is UK-based, which may help.
– Jim MacKenzie
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:
- Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.
- If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).
If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 35 ex tax. I don't know if there are cheaper suppliers in the US, but B&H sells the Foma film for US$50. A bit more expensive than here in Europe, but still half the price of the Ilford product.
Revenue maximisation and lack of competition:
- Especially with Ilford, it is very obvious that they are pricing their products based on willingness to pay in a certain market. Ilford products are e.g. significantly cheaper in the US or UK compared to mainland Europe.
- If you want 4x5″ 100ASA tabular grain black and white sheet film, your only two options are Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100, of which the Kodak film is even more expensive (at least in most markets).
If it doesn't have to be a tabular grain film and you are willing to consider other brands, there are at least a few more options. Here in Europe, I can get 50 sheets 4x5″ Foma 100 for around US$ 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.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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
add a comment |
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.
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.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
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