How do you cope with high film cost?

[TXForester]

If you are at a point where it's either photography or food, then you should relax on the photography for awhile and get your personal stuff together.

I thought it was hip to be a starving artist. It is in all the old movies. 😀

 

[rkm]

My new film habit is infinitely cheaper than my guitar habit. That said, I'm 40 and now is the first time in my life I've had a secondary area of passion. Music can be all consuming and poverty inducing. If I'd had a normal sort of career, I imagine I would have indulged in all sorts of hobbies by now.

I've chosen black and white film photography and self developing in part because it seemed like a cheaper option compared to digital depreciation (which I've suffered enough from with music technology). I wanted something creatively satisfying, affordable and enduring.

 

[rluka]

I only shoot colour and not interested in self processing. B&W and developing is not my idea of having fun, but each to their own.
So I make do with cheap film such as ColorPlus and save using more expensive film only for the very special occassions.
From the first time I used film, I know I'll be using both film and digital, so it's not a this-or-that situation and thus comparing the price also doesn't sound like an important argument.

Anyway, if the cost of shooting film goes up to 5~7% of my monthly paycheck, I would reduce my film consumption.

 

[kennylovrin]

I just accept the price, it differs a bit depending on how convenient I want it to be, either I boy online cheaper or get it straight away in a store.

However. I recently calculated how much film I'd get for the money if I was to sell my dslr kit. At my current rate I'd get about 6,5 years of b&w that I develop and scan myself for the current second hand price of my dslr. Had I not bought it to begin with that would have been about 8-9 years instead.

Now if I backtrack instead 5 years, I've already spent so much money on getting digital cameras that I have payed easily for 20 years of film at today's price.

Currently I prefer shooting with my 30 year old leica. 🙂

Anyway, loads of people doesn't consider it comparable like I just described it I'm sure. I'm not saying its like that for everyone, but I am saying it is in fact real money burnt into digital cameras that I just keep replacing when new ones are released. That my problem though, and I've enjoyed it up until now.

However, having color film developed I'm not so sure about, I have to give that a try for a while as it is effectively twice as expensive as I have to send it off, and also less convenient for the same reason.

 

[Michalm]

I wonder how people cope with new didi cams coming out every few months and folks keep ,,upgrading gear'' , i have actually seen drop in price of velvia and provia in Uk shops, or prices are staying more less the same, anyway i'm not pro photographer or taking more than 3 rolls per month during winter time , otherwise i would be using digital i guess.

 

[raid]

I added digital cameras to my film cameras.

 

[mackigator]

No offense to the working pros, but I get that the jobs pay for the workflow. But for the rest of us shooting film, it is getting more expensive of late, with fewer choices.

I cope by buying in bulk when I find a good price, as others have said. I'm particularly not afraid of fresh Superia 400.

What stinks is that films I used to stay on the hunt for are now just gone, discontinued.

As for keeping the other end of the equation manageable - develop and scanning costs - I just wrote about the hybrid film/digital workflows that I've found workable over on another thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123013&page=2

Film is wonderful but if you just buy at market price and then drop everything at a pro lab they'll kill you on the costs while, IMHO, not giving you the quality that you would get by using your own mind to find a different path to the final image.

 

[mugent]

The cost of film to me is negligible, as I simply don't shoot that much, I'm kinda fussy, I won't shoot for the sake of shooting, results are always disappointing that way.
Even if I did shoot more, compared to say, smoking, film is cheap. If you shoot b&w and process yourself, the cost is very small, it's just not free like we expect from digital these days.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

In 1958 my first 24 slide film and precessing etc was 32/6 pre-paid etc.

Using average earnings that would be over 74 pounds these days or using the RPI* makes it nearly 30 pounds.

Some of us can remember when a Rollei and 4 rolls (of 12 Exp 120 film) meant three weddings and a portrait took a couple of shots. It's what you do before squeezing the trigger that's important, imo.

Regards, David

*Retail Price Index

 

[mike-s]

Cheapest colour over in the UK Randy is Agfa Vista 200 at a Pounland store.
$1.6 for a 36 roll

I have just heard about it in our local (Newtownards, Belfast) Poundland. I am off to get some.

Whenever I see an offer on colour print film I buy it. Presumably because I am not a good enough photographer I have never been able to demonstrate to myself enough difference between print films to justify paying high prices.

 

[Johnmcd]

I don't find film expensive at all. I buy in bulk from B&H and even after postage into Australia it costs no more than a good coffee. I now bulk load as well which brings the cost down to less than $3 for 36 shots.

Processing them myself is half the fun and increases the involvement and ownership I have over my creations. I find the time I spend doing so, relaxing and enjoyable.

A coffee a day or a film a day. No big deal.

 

[Drtenma]

It's what you do before squeezing the trigger that's important, imo.

I completely agree with David.

I'm shooting less and less, but not because film is expensive. I'm just trying to improve my observation skills. For me it's important to remember the when, why and how of each photo.

 

[cosmonaut]

Well I have had my heart set on shooting some Velvia I am just going to have to bite the bullet. As far as some films, Kodak Gold or Fuji Superior. ect I believe I had rather shoot digital as to go through that much hassle. I have sort of an Amaericana theme I am wanting to try Velvia as I feel its the right choice and worth the effort.

 

[konicaman]

Well the prices might be slightly higher than a couple of years ago, but still it is kind of relative. I just reread a Danish photo book from 1963. At the time a colour film, processing and printing was app. 100 Danish Kroner. Also at the time a craftsman (e.g a carpenter) would make about 800 Kroner a month. Today - buying the cheapest film - the price would still be around 100 Kroner including prints, but the monthly pay for the same group is closer to 25.000 Kroner - so talking of expensive...

Still film can be expensive if you don't have the money. Paid jobs for me is 95% digital, so film is mainly for the fun of it, and I look for sales and film that are close to expiring.