Sustainability of 8x10 film given the pricing situation

[maltfalc]

there's always colour paper and x-ray film.

[Tin Can]

Somewhere today I saw a

KODAK proclamation they were dedicated to make more film

[Michael Wellman]

The other day Kodak did say they are committed to continue to make film as long as there is a demand. On the positive side, it is good to hear that they have decided to do this (unlike Fuji). The do make some of the finest films out there. The downside, the cost of their film and as a ULF photographer I can't use their film unless I purchase an obscene quantity of the film. However, I would rather complain about their prices than see them take the Fuji route and discontinue their product all together

Here's the link to the article on Kodak's announcement.
https://petapixel.com/2023/08/14/kod...nalog%20format.

[paulbarden]

It seems the sky is always falling, and yet none of us have been crushed by it yet.

[StuartR]

Yes, your own circumstances might be exceptional. Here in the US, only color 8X10 film is over $30 a sheet, while even Kodak TMax is less than $10, and Ilford about $7. So you might want to find someone who can buy it in the US and ship it to you affordably, or bring it on their own shooting excursions there. Likewise, it probably just isn't realistic for any lab in Iceland to offer 8x10 E6 processing, while it's relatively easy to find here in the US.

Thank you all for the thoughtful responses. Drew -- I think you might need to have another look at prices. Tmax 400 is currently 210 dollars for 10 sheets at B&H before tax and shipping. In certain cases special orders can be a bit cheaper, or if you can find short dated films, but in general Kodak around twenty dollars a sheet for black and white now (Tri-X is 18). Ilford is just under 9 dollars a sheet for Delta 100, and I recently bought a box of that to work with. This is my second box. The first one I bought in 2018 had a large visible coating error (a drop shape) on every sheet. It was my first box of 8x10 and not very visible in photos, so I decided not to exchange it and just use the film for experiments. It did not instill me with much confidence in Ilford, however, and was one of the factors behind me sticking with Tmax.
Like many of you I did buy a number of boxes and froze them and am finishing up now. I think I bought ten or fifteen boxes. I only have three left, however, so time is running short. I have also never wanted to be much of a hoarder, as even frozen film is fogged eventually from cosmic radiation, especially faster film like Tmax 400. This is not going to be a factor over four or five years, I would imagine, but I am still in my forties and buying enough film to last the rest of my life is not really practical like it might be for those of my colleagues who are a bit older than I am. I can and do shoot other formats as well, and have scaled back somewhat on 8x10, but I find it very sad, as it is such a beautiful format with a lot of possibilities precluded by smaller formats (such as beautiful contact prints...4x5 is just a bit too small for me in that context).

As for processing, I run an exhibition printing service and used to offer processing for clients, but as Drew hinted at, E6 is not practical to offer here. I do it myself with the Tetenal kits with good results, but no one in Iceland offers it commercially because there is no volume at all and the costs are huge here. It is a labor of love that I am ok to do, though I am jealous of those of you who can walk or drive to a pro lab with a process controlled dip and dunk setup.

In any case, I will soldier along, but it seems to me that as the bar of entry gets higher and higher, I think eventually there is not really going to be anyone left to buy it. I already know some 8x10 shooters from my MFA group that quit using it because the costs were not manageable, particularly in color. I think we are ok for awhile with black and white, but for color? 10 photos for 300 dollars plus processing and scanning? Maybe for certain high end fashion shoots, but harder to see for artists, even very talented ones who sell work.

[Daniel Unkefer]

1. 8x10 Fuji HRU XRAY film. 28 cents a sheet

2. 18x24cm Kodak French Mammography film 38 cents a sheet

3. Agfa Aviphot 24cm humongous roll 60 cents a sheet

4. Lot of expired 8x10 Kodak Ilford FOMA Shanghai et all. Ilford Commercial is fresh

5. 8x10 photo paper

6. Glass Dry Plates make your own emulsion to your taste

Color is a bit of a sticky wicket. Buy outdated?

[Michael R]

I sympathize. It isn't easy. I think particularly in the case of colour one needs to prioritize within the hobby. If it is specifically about the enjoyment of shooting 8x10 film, then you're stuck with the prices and doing what you can to economize - like making fewer photographs. If on the other hand the hobby is solely about the photography and end result, the obvious path in my opinion is to downsize in format. Relatively few people are making darkroom prints from film. Fewer still from 8x10 film and very few from 8x10 colour film. Since the process following film processing therefore involves scanning/editing for some form of digital output, from a practical perspective I'm not sure what there is to be gained from shooting 8x10 vs say 4x5 or even medium format.

Thank you all for the thoughtful responses. Drew -- I think you might need to have another look at prices. Tmax 400 is currently 210 dollars for 10 sheets at B&H before tax and shipping. In certain cases special orders can be a bit cheaper, or if you can find short dated films, but in general Kodak around twenty dollars a sheet for black and white now (Tri-X is 18). Ilford is just under 9 dollars a sheet for Delta 100, and I recently bought a box of that to work with. This is my second box. The first one I bought in 2018 had a large visible coating error (a drop shape) on every sheet. It was my first box of 8x10 and not very visible in photos, so I decided not to exchange it and just use the film for experiments. It did not instill me with much confidence in Ilford, however, and was one of the factors behind me sticking with Tmax.
Like many of you I did buy a number of boxes and froze them and am finishing up now. I think I bought ten or fifteen boxes. I only have three left, however, so time is running short. I have also never wanted to be much of a hoarder, as even frozen film is fogged eventually from cosmic radiation, especially faster film like Tmax 400. This is not going to be a factor over four or five years, I would imagine, but I am still in my forties and buying enough film to last the rest of my life is not really practical like it might be for those of my colleagues who are a bit older than I am. I can and do shoot other formats as well, and have scaled back somewhat on 8x10, but I find it very sad, as it is such a beautiful format with a lot of possibilities precluded by smaller formats (such as beautiful contact prints...4x5 is just a bit too small for me in that context).

As for processing, I run an exhibition printing service and used to offer processing for clients, but as Drew hinted at, E6 is not practical to offer here. I do it myself with the Tetenal kits with good results, but no one in Iceland offers it commercially because there is no volume at all and the costs are huge here. It is a labor of love that I am ok to do, though I am jealous of those of you who can walk or drive to a pro lab with a process controlled dip and dunk setup.

In any case, I will soldier along, but it seems to me that as the bar of entry gets higher and higher, I think eventually there is not really going to be anyone left to buy it. I already know some 8x10 shooters from my MFA group that quit using it because the costs were not manageable, particularly in color. I think we are ok for awhile with black and white, but for color? 10 photos for 300 dollars plus processing and scanning? Maybe for certain high end fashion shoots, but harder to see for artists, even very talented ones who sell work.

[StuartR]

Thanks Michael,
I agree. In color I stick primarily to digital. Other than that, I shoot the most in 6x7, a bit more in 4x5 and vanishingly little in 8x10 (I think I have done around 50 sheets since the beginning). I had thought about using illuminated 8x10 transparancies in purpose built boxes for an exhibition, but the costs involved and the potential of fading make it not cost effective to pursue. I remember reading back in the day that Ektachrome has visible fading after about 15 minutes of total lifetime projection, and though that is with a much brighter source, it still means that photos on display in this way would not last long. At this point I mostly use my 8x10 transparancies as a demonstration for my students. Of course I can still scan and print them, which I do, but as mentioned, 4x5 is not really inferior for most use cases in that sense. Anyway, thank you all for enduring my complaining. I hope Kodak and Fuji can find a way to bring the prices a bit more under control...hopefully from their investments in adjusting their production to match demand. As mentioned earlier, however, prices only ever seem to go up, never down. Rockets going up and feathers coming down, as they teach in economics I guess.

[Pete Oakley]

I might get jumped on but have you considered Foma. I like it but I haven't bought any for a few years now. It used to be shipped from Norway and that's non EU. Always got great service and reasonable prices. Ignore all the crap people push out about Foma, I've always got on well with it, it's just delicate when it's wet.

[domaz]

Color is a bit of a sticky wicket. Buy outdated?

The cheapest way to shoot "color" might be to shoot Blue and Greeen on X-ray film and the Red layer on normal B&W film. That would lower your total price per color frame from $18 a shot to a bit over $8 a shot. Worth the savings? Probably not.