Kodak Announcement: All Surviving Films subject to 15% Price Hike

[Tobias Key]

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2158527/kodak-hikes-prices-films


Kodak seems to actively want to destroy its business. Particularly hard for those of us in the UK who already pay around $60 a box for Portra 4x5 we'll be stumping up $68 instead of around $34 it'll cost in the US.

[toyotadesigner]

With this move they will commit suicide. It appears to me they forgot that Fuji is still there, waiting for a tiny mistake.

[Drew Wiley]

Don't count on it. Fuji's prices will probably rise too, and already have dramatically risen for certain products. Then they have an added form of overhead which Kodak doesn't - energy prices in Japan have understandably gone way up since the disaster last yr.

[Roger Cole]

Nah, no suicide. The market can stand that. In black and white Ilford is already more expensive. This will just bring them up to comparable prices, more or less. Fuji? Fuji has nothing comparable to Ektar 100 or Portra 400 IMHO. And those are good enough I'll pay more for them.

[Greg Blank]

Roger, until Kodak decides to discontinue them- which they will, like so many of the other products folks got use to. I am sure this list is much longer. In my opinion Kodak should just quit and get the hell out, leaving the market share to better & more nimble companies. This my short list.

VPS
PlusX sheet Film
Elite Graded B&W Paper
Luminere Film
All B&W papers - Including Azo.
All cut Color sheet RA papers.

[Roger Cole]

Maybe, in which case I will live with Fuji. Maybe not. The only thing I think anyone can be sure of is that "no one really knows."

[jp]

I'm just glad they are still making film. I figured there'd be a chance the bankruptcy (or a deal to prevent it) would have stopped it production. I've got a couple years worth in the freezer right now, so I'll always (in the future) using film at the price it was two-three years ago.

[Daniel Stone]

Well having "film" vs. one's favored emulsion is two different things. I for one LOVE Plus-X in sheet form. Its getting thin now, but I use it when I want that certain "look". TMX/TMY-2 don't cut it IMO.

Acros is great too, but I wish Fuji would decide to import a case of 8x10 into the USA, limiting it to 1box/person. That way we could spread the love and others could try it out. Its a great film.

For slides, I love E100G(RIP). Has a "truthfulness" about it that I've found Fuji's E-6 emulsions can't emulate the way I like. I like WYSIWYG results, so I know if the light is cool, I can add a warming filter, if its too warm, a cooling filter(or if I want too cool the scene for altered affects, or to accentuate overall color balance...)

So just because there's "film" available doesn't mean one has to accept the status quo of current emulsions. If you have emulsions that are critical to your workflow, that other emulsions cannot emulate, I'd personally find it hard to switch over.

However, when I finally shoot through the end of my stash of E100G in 4x5 and 8x10, I might research Fuji's offerings. But for now I'm rationing my shots to make sure I get the most keepers on the film I love.

-Dan

[Drew Bedo]

The rising cost of oil wil (and has already) drive up the cost of everything. a second factor is the devaluation of the Dollar which also drives price inflation.

[Roger Cole]

The rising cost of oil wil (and has already) drive up the cost of everything. a second factor is the devaluation of the Dollar which also drives price inflation.

Right now oil demand in the US is at more than a 10 year low, and supplies are plentiful. Even in the developing world, China's economy is slowing enough to scare the crap out of their leaders (still growing at what would be a prodigious pace in the west, but definitely slowing a lot.)

Once this speculation fueled oil bubble bursts just like the last one did and the price of oil tanks back to <$70/barrel, we'll see if all the prices for things that went up because transportation costs increased then come back down because they decrease again. I'll bet not.

[Brian Ellis]

With this move they will commit suicide. It appears to me they forgot that Fuji is still there, waiting for a tiny mistake.

If that's what Fuji is waiting for they'll be waiting a long time. Kodak doesn't make tiny mistakes, they only make really big ones.

[R-H-]

If price increases allows them to survive and continue to make films, then I'm happy.

[cjbecker]

I will no longer be able to justify tri-x 320. Going to start testing Ilford and see if i can get what i want out of it.

[jnantz]

they have been raising their prices ( 10-15% ) at least once a year for the past 24+ years ..
it is what they do, i don't see them stopping an age old tradition now ...

[buggz]

I really want 4x5 color films to remain, reversal and negative.

[Daniel Stone]

If WE want color(now negative only from EK, E-6 isn't even available via special-order, that's the real pity IMO) in 4x5 and 8x10 to remain, we have to KEEP BUYING IT.

that means when you buy, don't buy in bulk(like a full case, unless you NEED it immediately). Rather, buy 1box/month, or whatever you can do to continually purchase it on a REGULAR BASIS. This shows retailers that is a moving object, and its a viable product to keep in their inventory. They make orders, and the mfg's hopefully get the idea that we're still customers who are interested in their products.

just my $.02

Dan

[Roger Cole]

If that's what Fuji is waiting for they'll be waiting a long time. Kodak doesn't make tiny mistakes, they only make really big ones.

Ain't that the truth.


If price increases allows them to survive and continue to make films, then I'm happy.

+1, though there is a limit, particularly for films with viable alternatives, like all the B&W films.


I will no longer be able to justify tri-x 320. Going to start testing Ilford and see if i can get what i want out of it.

I don't see that Ilford is that much less expensive. In 35mm and 120 Ilford is MORE expensive (yet I still use both Kodak and Ilford.) In 4x5 Ilford is a little less expensive but it doesn't seem to be a wide spread.

[vinny]

Ain't that the truth.



+1, though there is a limit, particularly for films with viable alternatives, like all the B&W films.



I don't see that Ilford is that much less expensive. In 35mm and 120 Ilford is MORE expensive (yet I still use both Kodak and Ilford.) In 4x5 Ilford is a little less expensive but it doesn't seem to be a wide spread.

What? maybe in the small formats but not in LF, especially 8x10
look at the prices at badger or elsewhere:https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_list&c=253

[Roger Cole]

What? maybe in the small formats but not in LF, especially 8x10
look at the prices at badger or elsewhere:https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_list&c=253

I specifically compared 4x5 before my post to be sure. Maybe it's a matter of how much we consider a wide or significant difference. I did not compare 8x10, granted.

The Ilford in 100 sheet boxes is $1.05 (Delta 100) or $1.15 (FP4+, HP5+.) TXP is $1.57. The spread between $1.15 and $1.57 means the Ilford is 26.75% less expensive than TXP or, alternatively (though it sounds more) the TXT is 36.5% more than the Ilford FP4 and HP5. Significant, but not really all that much in my view.

In 8x10 you have a point. I just don't shoot 8x10 so I wasn't thinking that. TXP, while still available, is discontinued (another reason I thought you meant 4x5) but comparing Ilford to TMX and TMY at B&H:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Film+Type_B%26W+Negative&ci=335&N=4289268778+4291384683+4291407242+4129206495+4129206584

FP4+ and HP5+ are $3.49 per sheet, very slightly more for Delta 100, versus TMY at $7.35! (I don't see TMX - is it discontinued in 8x10 now too? At these prices though, who cares? Not many would buy it anyway.) TXP is almost sane in comparison at $5.50 - still hugely more than the Ilford both percentage wise and in absolute terms.

So yeah, in 8x10 I definitely see your point. 4x5 isn't that much different though. Odd how Kodak is absurdly more in 8x10, somewhat more in 4x5, and actually less expensive in rolls, or was up until now. This increase may put Kodak 35mm and 120 in the same range as Ilford.

[John NYC]

Film, especially LF film, is going to become a luxury item. Best get used to it.

[Brian C. Miller]

Film, especially LF film, is going to become a luxury item. Best get used to it.

Well, on APUG the ADOX rep said that they can make 35mm for $5/roll, so I don't think it will become that much of a luxury item. For 8x10 Portra, heck yes, I expect $20/sheet. It's possible that there's an uptick in general consumer demand (Freestyle's announcement), and it's also possible that it's a "dead cat bounce."

From Freestyle, 8x10, ASA 100, per sheet:
Adox: 3.54
Efke: 3.32
Arista: 2.40
Foma: 3.60
Ilford: 4.50
(Kodak Tri-X: 5.50, in my fridge from Glazer's)

Of course for slide film, it isn't a luxury item, it's a "bye bye now" item. I bought Provia from B&H, and it's fresh, but I wonder how long the imports from Japan will last.

Ah, well, it's hard to watch things wind down like this.

[Roger Cole]

Take up flying. 100 octane low lead gasoline is now $6.25 a gallon at my home field. Nearby field has it for $5.49, self service. The 172s I learned to fly in and occasionally rent will burn about 8 gallons per hour. In the case of us rental pilots though the rental rate is "wet" meaning fuel and all included. I started doing a check out in a Cherokee 180 (got one flight done, needed one more to rent it solo when winter, early darkness and hectic personal life intervened, will go back and finish this soon) rents for $129/hour, $124 if you pre-pay for a ten hour block, both plus sales tax so the $129 becomes $136.74 per hour all totaled, tax included.

I am not rich. I'm a middle class professional with a mortgage (two of 'em, in fact - when I bought my house no one was paying PMI, you paid your 5% down and got a 2nd mortgage for 15% of the purchase price and a primary mortgage for 80% of the price) on a now financially underwater house and a car loan. I just happen to love to fly enough to be a little compulsive about it and spend what some folks would consider a laughably large amount on what amounts to a hobby. Photography may be similar but isn't in the same league price wise. It's downright cheap in comparison.

[Scott Walker]

Take up flying. 100 octane low lead gasoline is now $6.25 a gallon at my home field. Nearby field has it for $5.49, self service. The 172s I learned to fly in and occasionally rent will burn about 8 gallons per hour.

Or take up boating, my little express cruiser gets 1.68 mpg @ 2,500 rpm and uses 26.6 gallons per hour at wot. Those are manufacturer published test results, my boat is not that easy on fuel.

So yeah, photography is relatively cheap in the grand scheme of things.

[Drew Wiley]

Depends what you're doing. Just printed a very long scale brightly-lit subject on 8X10 TMY,
with lots of critical sprarkly highlight as well as important deep shadow values. Basically a
hole-in-one as far as enlargement went. With HP5 the same scene would have required an
additional sheet of LF film to act as a contrast mask to get even marginally equivalent results, even with a premium VC paper. So which is cheaper? EU film would have required
maybe several sheets because at least one of them would have had a scratch on it. Now
I really like Ilford films like FP4 and HP5, and use quite a bit of them too, so therefore know
their pros and cons quite well, and when TMY has real advantages, even cost-wise.

[jp]

TMX got a bad rap since some TMX sheet film had a uv blocker in it, making it less suitable for contact printing in alt processes. TMY2 is different and never had the uv blocker. It is indeed a special and worthwhile film.

I was reading in Vieira's book on hurrell how tri-x 8x10 film's price from hurrell's time till 1997-ish was $5-something a sheet equivalent cost. I paid that much last year (13 years later) for B&H's remaining inventory. I really don't like paying several bucks a sheet for film, but it's cheaper than other hobbies like Roger describes. Shooting a few sheets is cheaper than a visit to the gas station. However Kodak selling it only ten sheets at a time doesn't make me feel like I'm getting a good deal nor does it promote consumption. if there were some quantity discount like for 50-100 sheets, I'd get a bigger pack and think to myself I'm getting it cheaper than most people and can use more than most people.


I'm saving money by getting serious with photography instead of sports cars or boats (or planes). I love to fly too and a short local hired flight once in a while is a cheap fix compared to getting into the hobby myself. I also have an old Jaguar sports car and it's easy to spend a $1k on repairs or upgrades. Not that I or many people would, but options are priced where the sky is the limit. $10k for a new performance oriented carburettor/intake setup. The truly wealthy hire teams of people to prepare vintage racing cars and the teams and bigrigs and cars travel the country for vintage racing. They give the yachting crowd a run for their money. I grew up working on Penobscot bay and have seen many crazy expensive yachting/sailing activities take place that also make photography cheap. I know people who have spent more than a year doing woodwork inside of yacht projects for customers.