Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
OK, so for some perspective:
- Ilford put up their prices by more than this when they went belly up about ten years ago.
- Ilford's price hikes over the last few years (in the UK) have been substantial. I cannot quantify them but I am confident they are as large as anyone's.
- Ilford film might be cheaper in the US, but in the UK Kodak film is significantly cheaper. Go figure. It seems that you get screwed buying film in its home market. I do not understand this and it make me mad that reimporting Ilford sheet film from the US and paying for overseas postage... and paying the UK's high import duties is still cheaper than buying it next to the factory that makes it (once you buy a few boxes).
Personally, a 15% hike would seem much more reasonable if one was confident they are committed to film, but I sense the problem is that most people dont believe they are. When Ilford restructured and put prices up across the board, there were clear press releases and a strategy for making film sustainable. While Kodak has introduced new emulsions (e.g. TMY-2) which is commendable, they are not filling anyone with confidence that these increased prices will mean an assured future supply.
I am so glad Ilford is doing well as a result of their initiatives, but I can buy TriX for over £1 less per roll in the UK, compared to HP5+ and the gap is even larger with TMY-2 and D400 (almost £2). If I buy 50 rolls the savings are obvious. Kodak sheet films (esp 10x8) are obscene in the UK and Ilford prices double those in the US. Foma sheet films, or Adox, are less than HALF the price of Ilford in the UK and far cheaper still compared to Kodak.
Brits get screwed with both Kodak and Ilford sheet film. It seems that only Ilford sheet film users in the US and British users of 35mm/120 Kodak get a good deal. The result of this pricing mayhem is that I used various films from different manufacturers in different formats because it quite literally saves me hundreds of pounds a year.
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Vaughn
If it was, we'd have all the film we want for a reasonable price. This is based on a Postal Service that handles 1/3 of the world's mail for a mere 44 cents for a letter anywhere in the US...and not much more to anywhere in the world (almost -- can one mail anything to Cuba?)
Except that the USPS lost $5 Billion last year. Probably not a good reference.
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
Adjusted for inflation and film photography is probably no more expensive
than it ever was. Quite a few commodities were kept artificially stable for
over a decade and now the rubber band is finally snapping. Plus there's a
lot of gaming in the petrochemical supply chain going on due to the usual
suspects and associated opportunism. Don't like it? Neither do I. But that
just made me disciplined yesterday to shoot one shot rather than two.
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
All you guys who kept up the pipe dream that Medium Format Digital Backs would eventually become affordable have finally gotten your wish. Except instead of the MFDB's prices falling, it's the film prices that have risen.
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vinny
For a hobbyist like myself, it's a big expense. I don't rent cars or book hotels. I prefer to shoot both color and b+w and when I moved up to 8x10, it was expensive but now it's $13/sheet for color plus developing, which I do myself. Man, when I got into 8x10 Arista 125 (ilford fp4) was $37/box. It just won't be doable once my stash of film runs out. It's hard enough justifying (to my wife) how much time/space I take up with this moneypit I call photography. I'd rather not change my methods but we're being forced to.
For color your point is very valid. If I shot 8x10 color I'd - well, I'd drop back to 4x5. It's a lot more available as well as cheaper.
But for black and white Arista, which is now re-packaged Foma not Ilford, is $2.40 a sheet (100) to $2.80 (200 and 400.) Efke is available for $2.80 a sheet from B&H but with a lead time for shipping (it's a bit over $3 at Freestyle.)
If I were shooting 8x10, which I very well may in the future, I'd go with Ilford, with maybe some re-branded Foma from time to time. I've shot a tiny amount of "Arista brand Foma," one roll of 120 and maybe ten sheets of 4x5, and so far had no problems with it, but I certainly trust Ilford's quality control a lot more.
Kodak 8x10 is ridiculous, even in black and white, when compared to the excellent Ilford films. (At least, in the US - maybe it's cheaper in the UK.) But considering how slow 8x10 is to shoot anyway, it's not prohibitive for someone who can afford the gear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Adjusted for inflation and film photography is probably no more expensive
than it ever was. Quite a few commodities were kept artificially stable for
over a decade and now the rubber band is finally snapping. Plus there's a
lot of gaming in the petrochemical supply chain going on due to the usual
suspects and associated opportunism. Don't like it? Neither do I. But that
just made me disciplined yesterday to shoot one shot rather than two.
+1 to gaming of oil prices and the idea that photography, as hobbies go, is still not really that expensive.
I won't even talk about the actual figures for what I pay to rent Cessna 172s and Piper Cherokee 180s and how much of that renting it took to get my pilot certificate. People think private pilots are rich but most of us are middle class professionals and blue collar folks who just have a passion for flying and are willing to make some sacrifices to be able to do it. Do that for a while then all your other hobbies will seem cheap. Giving up a night at the pub with a large burger and two pints once a week for more film doesn't seem to enter in to the thinking for photography.
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kevin J. Kolosky
I would ask anyone on this board if they would like to go back to what they were earning 10-15 years ago?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scott Walker
Absolutely
And so would Kodak...
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
I guess the other thing that puts it into perspective is that the 5d MkIII and the D800 are both much more expensive than than the outgoing models. I think I paid £2000 for my 5d mark II three years ago and the new one is starting off at £3000. So that's a 50% increase for early adopters probably coming down to 25-30% in a few months.
Just as well day rates aren't in the toilet and there's plenty of work around :p
How long do you think it'll be before you can spot a pro by the fact his equipment is a lot cheaper than an amateur's?
Re: Kodak increasing film prices by 15%
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dave Langendonk
Except that the USPS lost $5 Billion last year. Probably not a good reference.
The USPS has to ask permission from Congress every time it wants to change its business structure. One major reason its has lost so much money is that Congress has made them prefund future medical and retirement benefits. No other government entity or private company works within these restraints.