Price of Film Going Up

[r.e.]

Today I updated spreadsheets I have on the U.S. availability and prices of Fujinon, Ilford and Kodak films that are available in 4x5 and 8x10. The original spreadsheets, one for black and white and one for colour, were made on August 4, 2021. The data is from B&H.

Kodak Alaris, in particular, is implementing significant price increases for some Kodak films. For some Kodak B&W stocks, B&H says that the price reflects a temporary saving. I've noted these instances in the new B&W spreadsheet. In the new spreadsheets, I've also noted when the film is not in stock. In these instances, the price may not reflect what the price will be when the film is back in stock.

The second price in a cell is the price per sheet or per frame.

Black and White Film Stocks

August 4, 2021

223851



January 22, 2022

223852




Colour Film Stocks

August 4, 2021

223853


January 22, 2022

223854

[Michael R]

Buy or buy not. There is no afford. Lol.

[r.e.]

I had a problem getting the attachments to display properly, now fixed.

I think that this amounts to Kodak Alaris telling its customers for black and white film to move to other suppliers. One question is how Ilford will respond. Will it see the Kodak price increases as a green light to hike its own prices?

[Alan Klein]

I had a problem getting the attachments to display properly, now fixed.

I think that this amounts to Kodak Alaris telling its customers for black and white film to move to other suppliers. One question is how Ilford will respond. Will it see the Kodak price increases as a green light to hike its own prices?

I'm not moving. I'm staying with Kodak Tmax 100. It;s only 10% more than the equivalent Delta 100. Meanwhile Fuji stopped production of its; Velvia 100 and will eliminate some of its Velvia 50 soon.

[r.e.]

I'm not moving. I'm staying with Kodak Tmax 100. It's only 10% more than the equivalent Delta 100.

T-Max 10 sheets: $3.60/sheet (temporary $0.30 saving on this price)
T-Max 50 sheets: $2.80/sheet
Delta 25 sheets: $2.52/sheet
Delta 100 sheets: $2.00/sheet

If one wants the best pricing, a 100 sheet box of Delta is $200, and two 50 sheet boxes of T-Max is $280, or 40% more expensive.

[r.e.]

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Have you looked at the actual prices? I don't regard an increase in the price of 10 sheets of 8x10 T-Max 400 from US$100 to $170 as "just the way it works". At the moment, at least, HP5+ is $10/sheet less. That may be spare change to you, but I daresay that some people, indeed most, would have a different view.

My point was that Kodak Alaris is effectively inviting its customers to change suppliers. I don't quite get how a 70% price increase can be interpreted as benignly as you suggest. Do you really regard this as normal, and anyone who questions it, to use your word, as a "moaner"?

A 70% price increase is 12 times the current pandemic-induced inflation rate in OECD member countries.

I'd also like to address this sentence in your post: "There is no "signaling" to each other." As it happens, antitrust law (competition law outside the U.S.) is one of the few things that I know something about. "Price signalling" is a technical term. You appear to have decided that I'm alleging that there's a price-fixing scheme in the works, which is where that term is relevant. I have no idea how you got that from what I wrote. I simply raised the question of how Ilford will respond to Kodak Alaris's price hikes.

I didn't say, nor imply, anything whatever about price signalling and price fixing. As a matter of common sense, Ilford will be thinking about the fact that it prices 8x10 HP5+ 400 at $7.12 a sheet and Kodak Alaris is now pricing T-Max 400 at $17 a sheet. Also as a matter of common sense, people who shoot 8x10 ISO 400 B&W will be thinking about whether they want to spend $10/sheet more (240% more) for T-Max 400.

I happen to be making that decision now. I guess that I'm one of the people that you've branded as moaners. What I think is that you don't even know what the prices are, despite the fact that I put them right in front of you.

[Nodda Duma]

Ilford’s prices will likely increase as well, since the recent increases are due to material costs and supply issues.

Compare price changes with long-term silver spot price trends, as an example.

[esearing]

Prices never come down. So you must increase your income dedicated to your hobby or business, maybe even sacrifice elsewhere. I stopped eating lunch out and visiting coffee shops when I started working from home full time and saved myself $3000+ per year plus savings from not buying gas , work clothes, car repair, and other incidentals.

[Paul Ron]

thats the price of making art.

photography supplies, like many other art supplies, have always been expensive. although our cameras and lenses that once sold for thousands are dirt cheap now.

if you are selling your art, your profit margine is ridiculously high. if its only a hobby, the pleasure you get is priceless.

so whats the beef? if its too expensive, take up whittling.



.

[r.e.]

Ilford’s prices will likely increase as well...

I think the important point about Ilford is that it didn't give advance warning of its price increases in 2020 and 2021. Apparently they had immediate effect. There were two increases in 2020, and a third just before the August 4, 2021 spreadsheet in post #1. Kodak Alaris gave notice at the end of October that there would be "significant increases" in its prices for Kodak films, effective this month. Ilford has been silent since Kodak Alaris's October announcement.

For people who care about how much they pay for film stock, this suggests that purchasing decisions should be made now. The current gap between Ilford and Kodak pricing for 8x10 is particularly striking, with T-Max 400 costing 240% more per sheet than HP5+, and Tri-X 320 costing 200% more.

[paulbarden]

T-max in 8x10 has always been outrageously expensive compared to HP5. I see absolutely no reason to choose TMY in that format over something like Delta 100.
I feel bad for anyone who’s committed themselves to TMY and cannot find a way to switch to something less expensive. I wouldn’t want to be in that position. Two years ago I would not have guessed I’d be moving over to FP4, but that’s my first choice now, and I’m delighted by it.

I see no point in complaining about Kodak giving advance notice about price increases VS Ilford not doing so. (I recall that Ilford has given notice before a price hike, but I can’t verify that) You’d rather find out about a price rise only when you go to make a new purchase? Seems to me that this discussion started within the framework of “planning ahead”, in which case I would expect advance notice would be an asset.

[r.e.]

if its too expensive, take up whittling.

Or take up digital to the exclusion of analogue. I don't share the view that demand for film is insensitive to price and that Ilford and Kodak can charge whatever they want.

[paulbarden]

Or take up digital to the exclusion of analogue. I don't share the view that demand for film is insensitive to price and that Ilford and Kodak can charge whatever they want.

I think the reality is that K and I are charging what they have to in order to remain viable. We all know they’ve both been through a bankruptcy once…..

[bmikiten]

Clearly, most people who are shooting LF have some experience and therefore are probably not "blowing" a bunch of shots. I used to tell my more advanced students that they have to consider the cost of cheap, out of date, poorly coated, etc film with the potential loss of an image that will generate profits or pleasure (hobby). Imagine taking an 8x10 shot - how long did it take you to get to the location, set up, focus, etc. etc. Does that $10.00 (or whatever) difference really matter at that point? I was given a box of 8x10 film last year to test from a local teacher and was appalled at the chips and some coating issues in the emulsion. One occurred in the middle of a portrait. No thank you. There are other places to save.

Brian

[John Layton]

Students who are attempting to gain a foundation need to have both high quality and good consistency in their materials. Fortunately, these attributes tend to travel together!

[j enea]

in the last 18 months, a lot of things have gone up significantly in price, not just film. I feel things will continue to go up in prices, especially anything that requires overseas logistics. shipping cost has gone up 10 fold for a lot of things for many reasons.

I bought 3 100 sheet boxes of delta 100 in july last year for $159, now its $200, so kodak is not the only company who raised prices. and at least they gave us a warning of the upcoming price increase. and in the US Foma has gone up in price a lot as well.

john

[Alan Klein]

T-Max 10 sheets: $3.60/sheet (temporary $0.30 saving on this price)
T-Max 50 sheets: $2.80/sheet
Delta 25 sheets: $2.52/sheet
Delta 100 sheets: $2.00/sheet

If one wants the best pricing, a 100 sheet box of Delta is $200, and two 50 sheet boxes of T-Max is $280, or 40% more expensive.

If you buy 100 sheets. If you buy 25 sheets there's only a 10% difference. My wife shops at Costco and keeps getting those extra large quantities, half of which go bad before we eat them. :)

[Alan Klein]

Have you looked at the actual prices? I don't regard an increase in the price of 10 sheets of 8x10 T-Max 400 from US$100 to $170 as "just the way it works". At the moment, at least, HP5+ is $10/sheet less. That may be spare change to you, but I daresay that some people, indeed most, would have a different view.

My point was that Kodak Alaris is effectively inviting its customers to change suppliers. I don't quite get how a 70% price increase can be interpreted as benignly as you suggest. Do you really regard this as normal, and anyone who questions it, to use your word, as a "moaner"?

A 70% price increase is 12 times the current pandemic-induced inflation rate in OECD member countries.

I'd also like to address this sentence in your post: "There is no "signaling" to each other." As it happens, antitrust law (competition law outside the U.S.) is one of the few things that I know something about. "Price signalling" is a technical term. You appear to have decided that I'm alleging that there's a price-fixing scheme in the works, which is where that term is relevant. I have no idea how you got that from what I wrote. I simply raised the question of how Ilford will respond to Kodak Alaris's price hikes.

I didn't say, nor imply, anything whatever about price signalling and price fixing. As a matter of common sense, Ilford will be thinking about the fact that it prices 8x10 HP5+ 400 at $7.12 a sheet and Kodak Alaris is now pricing T-Max 400 at $17 a sheet. Also as a matter of common sense, people who shoot 8x10 ISO 400 B&W will be thinking about whether they want to spend $10/sheet more (240% more) for T-Max 400.

I happen to be making that decision now. I guess that I'm one of the people that you've branded as moaners. What I think is that you don't even know what the prices are, despite the fact that I put them right in front of you.

You're assuming that the other manufacturers won't raise their prices soon.

[Sal Santamaura]

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Yup. This nonsense even comes up somewhat less often here than it does at PHOTRIO.

Just two weeks ago the latest in a seemingly endless stream of such threads there prompted me to reply. I wrote:


"...nonsense is disgruntled Kodak-haters pissing in the wind bitching and moaning about prices. At PHOTRIO, of all places, a forum that represents a minuscule fraction of the film market's customers. Endlessly repeated whining that accomplishes nothing while occupying bandwidth and others' time. Nonsense, indeed."


And this site represents a fraction of PHOTRIO's minuscule fraction of the film market's customers! So enjoy pissing in the wind. :)

[Alan Klein]

Or take up digital to the exclusion of analogue. I don't share the view that demand for film is insensitive to price and that Ilford and Kodak can charge whatever they want.

I'm sure Kodak considered the competition. But for whatever the reasons, increased cost of materials, labor or other reasons, they raised their prices. They understand higher prices means less demand and fewer sales especially when competition is so much cheaper. No company wants to price itself out of the market. My concern is that inflation is raising the prices of everything. So it's all being compounded.

[paulbarden]

Have you looked at the actual prices? I don't regard an increase in the price of 10 sheets of 8x10 T-Max 400 from US$100 to $170 as "just the way it works". At the moment, at least, HP5+ is $10/sheet less. That may be spare change to you, but I daresay that some people, indeed most, would have a different view.

I happen to be making that decision now. I guess that I'm one of the people that you've branded as moaners. What I think is that you don't even know what the prices are, despite the fact that I put them right in front of you.

Yes, I looked at the prices in your spreadsheets. Why would I be commenting if I hadn’t reviewed what you presented??

And no, I don’t buy TMY in sheets anymore. Certainly not spending $17 per 8x10 of the stuff! Why would I, when FP4 is so much less costly?! Looking at your profile, it appears FP4 and HP5 are your chosen films, so why you’re worried about the price of TMY, I don’t know.

[Hugo Zhang]

People could buy Tmax 400 8x10 at $119 plus 10% discount with a code a few days ago. Midmest sometimes has deals too for Ilford. $139 for FP4 8x10 for example.

[paulbarden]

I'm sure Kodak considered the competition. But for whatever the reasons, increased cost of materials, labor or other reasons, they raised their prices. They understand higher prices means less demand and fewer sales especially when competition is so much cheaper. No company wants to price itself out of the market. My concern is that inflation is raising the prices of everything. So it's all being compounded.

In 2020 there came a warning that silver prices were going to jump dramatically, and in early August, prices that had been $16 and $17 per ounce suddenly spiked at just over $29! It’s closer to $24 right now, and seems to be trending downward. But the price if silver is certainly going to have a direct effect on the cost of film manufacture.

[Steve Sherman]

I personally only support those who support our tiny community, so the great Yellow Father doesn't exist in my world. Of course film is going to rise in price given the shutdown in '20. I'm just thankful that the Ilford found a way, and commitment to stay solvent.

[r.e.]

You're assuming that the other manufacturers won't raise their prices soon.

I've already said three times in this thread, including in the post that you quoted, that the question is how Ilford will respond :) From post #3: "One question is how Ilford will respond. Will it see the Kodak price increases as a green light to hike its own prices?"

[r.e.]

People could buy Tmax 400 8x10 at $119 plus 10% discount with a code a few days ago. Midmest sometimes has deals too for Ilford. $139 for FP4 8x10 for example.

Thanks Hugo for a rather helpful post.

[paulbarden]

What I would find helpful and potentially enlightening would be hearing from others how they’ve strategized their techniques to optimize film usage, and reduce waste. I do fairly well in this regard after 5 years practice with 8x10, but it is still my habit to expose two (sometimes three) sheets of film for each scene. If I could be certain of getting things exactly right (or close enough) with a single sheet of film, then I’d be doubling the number of images obtained per box of film. Do any of you expose one sheet of film for any given image? If so, how have you finessed your process in order to achieve a good negative nearly every time?

I’m not unhappy with my technical ability as it impacts film usage. I don’t think two sheets per image is unreasonable. But then I’m not using Kodak sheet films - I’ve been more than satisfied with FP4 and Delta 100, so I’m not burning $17 for every 8x10 negative I make. If I had no choice but to pay that much per sheet, I’d find a cheaper option (I can make an 8x10 wet plate glass negative for about $1.00, and paper negatives would start to look very appealing too. And hand-coating dry plates with Foma liquid emulsion is far less costly also), but for now, Ilford’s offerings are both exceptional in quality and I can still afford them, but I’m starting to be less cavalier in my use of these materials.

I see no point in sowing unhappiness when viewing the costs of making analog photographs. Considering how badly things went 10-15 years back, I’m just glad I can still buy these materials at ANY price.

[Bernice Loui]

Sheet film image making has never. been low cost. As the sheet film size goes up, the cost per sheet goes up faster than the "X" factor of image size due to the area of of sheet film. Or there are effectively four sheets of 4x5 per one sheet of 8x10 or almost two sheets of 4x5 per sheet of 5x7.

Not just the cost of film there is the cost of processing, and most valuable of all your time (not replaceable once used) and all related resources required to make images.

This why so much TooTing about staring the view camera journey at 4x5 as it is the lowest cost with easiest access to view camera stuff and offers all that needs to be learned for how to view camera.

Once the image maker is to the point where few if any sheets of film is wasted per image, then larger sheet film formats can or should be considered. This is much about being efficient and effective and economical as possible making sheet film images. Curious side effect of this wisdom, it often carries over to image making with any image recording device from phone to view camera.


Bernice

[Kiwi7475]

I am happy E100 hasn’t gone up and I enjoy it very much in 8x10. Particularly in the context of Fuji’s current doings (undoings?).

Obviously if you want to save money , buy as much as you can as soon as possible, and freeze it. Take the plunge now or pay some factor if you sprinkle over time and only consume as you need.

[Monty McCutchen]

View cameras and sheet film make me happy every time I’m lucky enough to scratch out time to immerse myself in it. I’ve had more moments of grace and sublimity there than many areas of my life combined.

It’s absence? Now that would be expensive.

[Drew Wiley]

Ektachrome 8X10 is four times the price as the last time I bought it. Ektar and Portra 8X10 are now also four times the price as what the boxes of it in my freezer cost. Cost-wise, 4x5 is the new 8x10. Hell... that's nuthin'. EVERYTHING is exploding in price. How would you feel if your house just burned down (like thousands have in recent forest fires here) and then discovered that plywood and siding and flooring are triple the price of just a couple years ago - IF you can even find them! Lucky if your insurance policy gives you enough to even clear the lot and lay a foundation. There are all kinds of mostly covid-related cost, manufacture, and distribution issues right now. Some of these things will drop in price once the supply and delivery crisis starts to normalize again. I don't know about film itself - probably not. All depends on your financial priorities. Just don't buy your daily morning latte and croissant at Starbucks. If starvation sets in, a leather bellows can always be salted and boiled.

[John Kasaian]

If starvation sets in, a leather bellows can always be salted and boiled.
Chimichurri really improves the flavor. Just sayin'

[ic-racer]

I can't recall 4x5 film prices ever going down since the 1970s, however, 4x5 cameras, lenses, film holders, and enlargers all became nearly free. Maybe that fules the discontent for some people.

[Duolab123]

Price increases of color films are insane. Food, cars, everything is ballooning. It is going to drive some out. 17 bucks for a 35mm roll of Ektar that was 6 bucks a couple years ago. I'm stocked, I have a lot to shoot up.

[Peter De Smidt]

Price increases of color films are insane. Food, cars, everything is ballooning. It is going to drive some out. 17 bucks for a 35mm roll of Ektar that was 6 bucks a couple years ago. I'm stocked, I have a lot to shoot up.

It's driven me out, at least for the time being :(

[Kiwi7475]

Price increases of color films are insane. Food, cars, everything is ballooning. It is going to drive some out. 17 bucks for a 35mm roll of Ektar that was 6 bucks a couple years ago. I'm stocked, I have a lot to shoot up.

Kodak Gold 200 is still $7/roll if bought in 3.

Just kidding.

You’re right everything is ballooning — and not just film. Everything. I don’t understand how this is sustainable, and I don’t see it going down.

[Bernice Loui]

Stopped doing any color film early 2000's. Even then it has been most if not all B&W sheet or roll film since.

Yes, film has a different image rendition than digital. The missing ingredients would be the infrastructure that once extensively supported color film and high quality color prints.

There is a tiny incentive to do 35mm color transparency film viewed via high quality projection. Other than this, the color print options are most common digital centric.
Thus, the color image stuff today comes out of a digital camera.


Bernice

[Paul Ron]

Price increases of color films are insane. Food, cars, everything is ballooning. It is going to drive some out. 17 bucks for a 35mm roll of Ektar that was 6 bucks a couple years ago. I'm stocked, I have a lot to shoot up.


remember when the movies was 25 cents for a double feature n a cartoon and you can stay all day? penny candies were a penny and hi test gas was 35 cents a gal? my first 3 bed room appartment on central park west in nyc was $125/ month. my kids are paying $2000/ month in astoria queens.

yeah its sticker shock but realize how much your pay check was compared to now?

besides, i gota drop dead with zero ballance so my dead beat uncle sam has to get a job.

[Michael R]

Only 2000 in Astoria? Not bad actually.


remember when the movies was 25 cents for a double feature n a cartoon and you can stay all day? penny candies were a penny and hi test gas was 35 cents a gal? my first 3 bed room appartment on central park west in nyc was $125/ month. my kids are paying $2000/ month in astoria queens.

yeah its sticker shock but realize how much your pay check was compared to now?

besides, i gota drop dead with zero ballance so my dead beat uncle sam has to get a job.

[Dugan]

When the price of film goes up, I expose fewer sheets.
I'm more selective of subject matter.
Therefore, the quality of my images goes up.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
:rolleyes:

[Ethan]

Film prices are going up, but that's to be expected from an industry which though getting more popular, is still very niche compared to what it was a few decades ago. I think the increases we're seeing now are made more dramatic by pandemic related supply chain issues, so the increases may not be this bad in coming years, but without commercial users (which I don't think will happen again) it won't go back to pre digital prices, even adjusted for inflation.

Not that I think Kodak and other manufacturers are completely benevolent institutions who aren't in it for profit, but I'm willing to pay more for film, and maybe shoot less if the alternative is these companies going under and there being no film.

[Alan Klein]

Kodak Gold 200 is still $7/roll if bought in 3.

Just kidding.

You’re right everything is ballooning — and not just film. Everything. I don’t understand how this is sustainable, and I don’t see it going down.

You'll have to give up your Starbucks fix.

[Rayt]

Yikes. I’ll just keep shooting 5x7. I would pay the increase if I could get TMax in 5x7 though.

[esearing]

Found this article interesting https://silvergrainclassics.com/en/2021/10/film-prices-analysed/. But don't let the graphs fool you, they show a consistent INCREASE of 8%-14% every year.

Unfortunately film is not a commodity that can be bought today and sold for a higher price in the future. Until we start running out.

[j enea]

...Unfortunately film is not a commodity that can be bought today and sold for a higher price in the future. Until we start running out.

I don't know. based on the prices people are paying for expired film, it looks like the sellers are making a healthy profit, albeit on smaller quantities.

[Duolab123]

I don't know. based on the prices people are paying for expired film, it looks like the sellers are making a healthy profit, albeit on smaller quantities.

I don't understand why. Young guys I have talked with prefer really old film, even leave fresh film in a hot car to alter it. Crazy funny!

[goamules]

The price goes up for a myriad of reasons, causing more to stop buying it, and less to consider using film for the first time. So then the prices go up more. It's a death spiral.

[Kiwi7475]

The price goes up for a myriad of reasons, causing more to stop buying it, and less to consider using film for the first time. So then the prices go up more. It's a death spiral.

I would think so too but have you seen the prices at which old camera gear and lenses are selling for? The price of many has skyrocketed insanely. Yet they been going up and up, and in many instances we are now about x4, or even x5 the price they had 7-8 years ago. Those people need film too. The entry barrier to film has risen dramatically and yet doesn’t seem to have stopped many — and has created a huge demand on what already exists.

[Ulophot]

Without going into matters that are germane to, but outside of, the realm of this forum, I feel impelled to add a note to this dialogue, not wishing to sidetrack it but only to contribute a consideration or two to the subject issue.

Essentially two factors ought to be taken into account. It is the means of their resolution that gets into "politics", i.e., policy-making decisions, that I will leave out.

First, the physical economy of the U.S. and the "west" very broadly defined is a real mess and has been worsening for decades. Exciting start-ups and a few successful large manufacturing successes are laudable, but they do not replace an entire "fabric" our formerly industrialized economy. Increasingly, the deregulated, speculation-driven international economy of financial manipulations centered in several cities has given the ancient Roman colliseum's thumbs up or down to the physical side.

Second, and as a result, all sorts of industries and the productive capacities and knowledge required for economics-of-scale manufacturing in many areas -- film photography as a small subset -- have been eroded, taken down, swept away. In consequence, the physical economy generally has become a scramble, and that has, as we all know, been exacerbated by the pandemic. All sorts of things are "upside-down," not just film prices.

To some degree, a reviving film-photography-related industry, however it may develop, will benefit from today's wonderful digital technologies, improved manufacturing techniques and processes, etc. We see it from some of the start-ups, using 3-D printing, laser-cutting, digital miniaturization, etc. However, somewhere you need high-quality steel, machine tools, and a certain scale of manufacturing with precise quality control -- run by experienced people -- functioning in a not-upside-down economy, with some longer-term predictability (in capital financing, for instance). And, as Shakespeare's Hamlet says, "...ay, there's the rub."

[Drew Wiley]

In terms of cost, 4x5 is the new 8x10. The boxes of 8x10 color in my freezer cost me about one fourth as the current asking rate, though some of that extreme price hike is note doubt due to the terrible manufacture and distribution issues MANY industries are facing. Just look at the plywood and related sheet goods for example - not much selection, and what is available cost three times as much as it did even two years ago, before the pandemic kicked in. A lot of that increase will drift back down based on supply and demand interaction. Those are widely needed commodities. And a lot of selfish gaming of the pandemic is going on at the Ports and with the container industry which further exacerbates the issue. But having far lower demand, sheet film might go back down a little as things improve, but will probably never be as affordable as before. They have to find some kind of solid financial incentive to keep it going.

Right now I'm trying to decide whether to load 4x5 or 8x10 holders for an upcoming trip. I don't want my frozen stock to get too old before I use it; but neither do I like the idea of spending four times as much per box to replace it. I'm sorta planning to have my inventory of 8x10 stock slowly drift down during my 70's, and then let my own physical condition in my 80's determine how much interest I still might hold for the larger format. The bigger problem right now is still waiting for my wide roll of color paper to come in. If everything goes to hell ... well, even though Springtime is not ordinarily my black and white printing season, it could be. I had no choice the past two years, and certainly didn't want to add even a small amount of irritation to my lungs due to color chemistry until the virus got under better control, and only did enough color printing to use up the last of the color paper I did already did have on bad before it went bad. Some already did.

[Kiwi7475]

In terms of cost, 4x5 is the new 8x10. The boxes of 8x10 color in my freezer cost me about one fourth as the current asking rate, though some of that extreme price hike is note doubt due to the terrible manufacture and distribution issues MANY industries are facing. Just look at the plywood and related sheet goods for example - not much selection, and what is available cost three times as much as it did even two years ago, before the pandemic kicked in. A lot of that increase will drift back down based on supply and demand interaction. Those are widely needed commodities. And a lot of selfish gaming of the pandemic is going on at the Ports and with the container industry which further exacerbates the issue. But having far lower demand, sheet film might go back down a little as things improve, but will probably never be as affordable as before. They have to find some kind of solid financial incentive to keep it going.

Right now I'm trying to decide whether to load 4x5 or 8x10 holders for an upcoming trip. I don't want my frozen stock to get too old before I use it; but neither do I like the idea of spending four times as much per box to replace it. I'm sorta planning to have my inventory of 8x10 stock slowly drift down during my 70's, and then let my own physical condition in my 80's determine how much interest I still might hold for the larger format. The bigger problem right now is still waiting for my wide roll of color paper to come in. If everything goes to hell ... well, even though Springtime is not ordinarily my black and white printing season, it could be. I had no choice the past two years, and certainly didn't want to add even a small amount of irritation to my lungs due to color chemistry until the virus got under better control, and only did enough color printing to use up the last of the color paper I did already did have on bad before it went bad. Some already did.

If you can, use your old stock and replenish it with the same amount of new stock now (ie. buy what you use). You can probably be sure it’ll be yet another x2 or even more expensive in N years than it is now. And if you don’t use it I’m sure you’ll be able to sell it easier than really old stock, and probably for more than you’d pay now.

As for 8x10 vs 4x5, go with your heart. Also I ask myself, how many more years will you be hauling this 8x10? Time’s ticking, life’s shorter than film stock. Isn’t that why we do 8x10? Because for most of us there’s no “real” reason to use 8x10 over 4x5…

This is what I do…

[jnantz]

Sorry to ask this but do Slavic, Foma, Adox, Arista, Shanghai and Lucky still make sheet film, or are Kodak and Ilford the only ones left ?
It's been a while since I have bought or priced film ... Im using silver nitrate, which is cheap by comparison and it's not difficult to coat paper and make prints from home made paper negatives.
Denise Ross has simple instructions on making sheet film from home made emulsion on her website and in her books, even if a box of store bought film goes up to 600$ a box all is not lost.

** edited not astia but Arista

[Drew Wiley]

Well, it would be stupid to pay top dollar for 8x10 at the moment. Due to shortages, there can be no doubt that a bit of price gaming is going on, just like it always has before, during previous shortages. In the past I've gotten onto Keith Canham's volume order lists, which are about as fairly priced as anything I can think of. But I did recently stock up well on 4x5 just before the formally announced price hikes. 120 film isn't so bad, but still itself took quite a price hike after the first of the year.

Once the demise of Cibachrome was handwriting on the wall, I liquidated all my 8x10 chrome film to others who wanted it, while that frozen inventory of my own was still entirely good. Now I only print chromes via internegs onto RA4 chromogenic media. Everything going forward, shooting-wise, has been C41 film, primarily Ektar. I'm no machine-gunner anyway.

Home-made film and discount brands won't help my own needs whatsoever. A whole different topic, really, for those who can use those options.

There are technical advantages to enlarging 8x10 color over 4x5, that become apparent in actual optical prints of sufficient size, though not so much in digital prints. I only go the optical printing route. But it's really just the "feel" of the relevant subject matter which dictates my choice. Depth of field logistics are different, very long perspectives favor 4x5 gear, and sometime just the sheer joy of looking through the larger ground glass of 8X10 decides its use instead. I can handle it all, at least for awhile. I like to get well away from the road and up into the hills. But I have some tricks up my sleeve as I age, like owning a large CF tripod for my 8x10 needs for when the big maple Ries will simply become too heavy, at least away from the road. Not there yet, but I can't fool myself I'll be able to lug all that forever. Long haul days-on-end backpacking is inherently more restrictive now, and I'm down to a lightweight 4x5 folder for that particular application.

[abruzzi]

sure, Foma, Adox, and Shanghai all make sheet film--not sure about the others. I mostly shoot Foma in sheet sizes, as well as Bergger in 4x5, with some Fuji and Kodak for 4x5 E6.

[Kiwi7475]

Sorry to ask this but do Slavic, Foma, Adox, Astia, Shanghai and Lucky still make sheet film, or are Kodak and Ilford the only ones left ?
It's been a while since I have bought or priced film ... Im using silver nitrate, which is cheap by comparison and it's not difficult to coat paper and make prints from home made paper negatives.
Denise Ross has simple instructions on making sheet film from home made emulsion on her website and in her books, even if a box of store bought film goes up to 600$ a box all is not lost.

Foma, Adox and Shanghai still produce film. But only b&w. I’m not familiar with Slavic. Astia was Fuji — no longer available.

[jnantz]

sorry I misspelled arista the free style stuff...

[Tin Can]

Buy now!

[Alan Klein]

In terms of cost, 4x5 is the new 8x10. The boxes of 8x10 color in my freezer cost me about one fourth as the current asking rate, though some of that extreme price hike is note doubt due to the terrible manufacture and distribution issues MANY industries are facing. Just look at the plywood and related sheet goods for example - not much selection, and what is available cost three times as much as it did even two years ago, before the pandemic kicked in. A lot of that increase will drift back down based on supply and demand interaction. Those are widely needed commodities. And a lot of selfish gaming of the pandemic is going on at the Ports and with the container industry which further exacerbates the issue. But having far lower demand, sheet film might go back down a little as things improve, but will probably never be as affordable as before. They have to find some kind of solid financial incentive to keep it going.

Right now I'm trying to decide whether to load 4x5 or 8x10 holders for an upcoming trip. I don't want my frozen stock to get too old before I use it; but neither do I like the idea of spending four times as much per box to replace it. I'm sorta planning to have my inventory of 8x10 stock slowly drift down during my 70's, and then let my own physical condition in my 80's determine how much interest I still might hold for the larger format. The bigger problem right now is still waiting for my wide roll of color paper to come in. If everything goes to hell ... well, even though Springtime is not ordinarily my black and white printing season, it could be. I had no choice the past two years, and certainly didn't want to add even a small amount of irritation to my lungs due to color chemistry until the virus got under better control, and only did enough color printing to use up the last of the color paper I did already did have on bad before it went bad. Some already did.

My dad said to me when I was a much, much younger man, "You know, without your health you got nothing." So stay healthy and the rest will take care of itself.

[SergeyT]

There was another thread about upcoming 20% prices increase by Kodak, just a couple months ago.
Some did not see, some ignored, some took it as a joke while others filled-up their freezers :cool:

Prices on used film gear somewhat stabilized now. I am anticipating to see a slow but inevitable decline soon. Cost of "ownership" of high-end digital becoming less than film and while it is not film it becomes more and more of a viable option if making images is the goal.

[SergeyT]

My wife shops at Costco and keeps getting those extra large quantities, half of which go bad before we eat them. :)
Booz does not go bad and there is a lot of other items at Costco that don't go bad and are cheaper than elsewhere ;)

[Alan Klein]

There was another thread about upcoming 20% prices increase by Kodak, just a couple months ago.
Some did not see, some ignored, some took it as a joke while others filled-up their freezers :cool:

Prices on used film gear somewhat stabilized now. I am anticipating to see a slow but inevitable decline soon. Cost of "ownership" of high-end digital becoming less than film and while it is not film it becomes more and more of a viable option if making images is the goal.

Since the cost of meat is going up as well, there will be more room in the freezer for film. ;)

[Drew Wiley]

Yeah, but if the cost of meat or whole turkey goes down, my wife will try to sneak another turkey or big rack of ribs into my darkroom freezer!

[Ulophot]

What, Drew? she has a key?