Peter Jennings
Well-known
The link above refers to the Film Toaster Personal (which I guess is the economy version) that sells for $999.
Filmtoaster - a device that works with your camera to digitize negatives (only 2400$)
- Thread starter Tijmendal
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 69
- Views 9K
roscoetuff
Well-known
I'd agree. AND the guy is a photographer. You'd think folks would cut him some slack... Give him credit for building a different option? Nope. Price too high? Perhaps. I'd call it "prototype pricing"... probably not much over the cost of custom machining, painting, etc. with something left over. Anyone who's done this will typically order a couple of hundred for the warehouse, but all the profit tends to lie in selling the last 30 or so units.
More to the point is whether the hardware actually works the way it is intended and is easier to get 1st class results or not. My bet is his system out-of-the-box delivers more repeatable results because your set-up is locked and loaded. Something to be said for that. Does it justify the price? Mileage may vary, but I think it depends on how you define what you want... of which the neg scan itself may not be the only thing.
Again, compared to those who've spent $16,000 to $25,000 on a Hasselblad Flextight scanner - and I've read blogs by talented photographer who despite the expectations of financial hardship, apparently have the scratch to do so and they assume they're not the only ones out there... so there's a world out there where this is dirt cheap rather than ridiculously priced. And even if you allow the Hasselblad's resale is much more certain than a one-of-a-kind piece of hardware like this, a Flex just doesn't cross the plane of possibility in my mind. Back in the day, from what I've read, commercial scanners were 10 times even the Hasselblad's price and required a complete professional staff... all since sadly let go as magazines began demanding digital originals.
It's one thing to say (or acknowledge) Film Toaster's price is high. That's easy. But it's another to suggest that there is more value in a 10-year plus piece of equipment that reputedly doesn't even run unless you have Windows XP - a system 10 years plus out of date itself, and most likely something you'd have to run in a virtual environment. (If that's not true, please speak up... 'cause that might change the calculus) All of that is less and less credible to me... especially with DSLR scanning, and DSLR's scan quality at speed. My Plustek at least offers Windows 10, and while a medium quality scan isn't quick, it is working "for now" and what I have, and a bird in hand...
Final thought: sometimes, ideas like the Film Toaster suffer for other reasons. Some deserved, some not. But like the prototype for the upcoming Lab Box Kickstarter... I don't get the impression that the original of the Lab Box from the 1950's or 1960's was much of a hit... but yet some found value there, it developed a cult following and now today, it's re-invention has been something of a prospective "sensation". Possible the same may hold here. And Cecil (Film Toaster man) ain't a youngster but probably 70+.
Just sayin': My mind is open... even if my wallet is squeakin' at the moment.
mani
Well-known
As Peter points out, there are different versions of the FilmToaster - including a commercial or 'personal' model that includes a film holder and costs $999.
The main target audience (as others have pointed out) are institutions and companies with very large numbers of slides and negatives that need to be digitized, and therefore most of the information on the website is targeting them. But the $999 version is prominently linked from the first page - so there's no point pretending it costs more than this.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I have nothing against Dslr scanning. It works well, as the results many RFF members have show me demonstrates. I don't do it because I already own a Nikon LS-8000ED film scanner, and to do SLR scanning I would need to go buy some things I don't have (a macro lens, copy stand, and good light box). The Nikon produces incredible scans, so no reason to spend money on something I don't need.
I do object to the Film Toaster. It is emblematic of the kind of attitude that so many manufacturers of photo gear have toward their customers. Namely, that we're all brain-dead walking plies of money who will pay anything, no matter how outrageous. The Film Toaster is not worth the money charged for it. Stop letting these businesses prey on us. Its like paying ransom to terrorists; it just emboldens them to go bigger the next time.
jsrockit
Moderator
I'm 43 and old enough to know that everyone who is 25 is not an idiot. I'm not into this product, but the whole generalization of hipsters is tiresome.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
No, not all 25 yr olds are idiots, but hipsters are. I can't imagine living a life characterized by the mindless cookie-cutter conformity that I see in these overindulged semi-educated fools with no real knowledge or experience of the real world.
Hopefully, its a passing phenomenon. I saw no hipsters in my years as a high school teacher, so I have hope in the younger generation. Many of my kids, including the inner-city kids that no one has any hope for, were very intelligent.
f16sunshine
Moderator
So much negativity.
....Sheesh.🙄
....Sheesh.🙄
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I prefer my £60 used Canoscan 8600F and with the rest money i can buy a second hand car....
mani
Well-known
But this doesn't address the problem: which is that there's a real need that isn't being fulfilled by the manufacturers right now.
If I had the time and expertise then I'd try to achieve some constructive solution: possibly a Kickstarter for a plastic-injection version of this sort of thing. It's hardly an original idea, and there are plenty of different versions for 'lightweight' scanning with cellphones and so on, so 'scanning' with a DSLR is hardly patented.
But while I agree that the FilmToaster is very high-priced, as I've said before it's easier for a newbie than gathering together all the other bits and pieces that need a degree of expertise to locate, buy and put together. And if you're starting from scratch, then the final price difference might not even be so great (not everyone is that good at finding quality secondhand copy stands, and so on).
roscoetuff
Well-known
Cecil Williams - Mr. Film Toaster btw, suggests the competeing product is the volume scanner here: https://dtdch.com/film/ and with a short demo here: http://https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=mcafee&p=digital+transitions+film+scanner#id=2&vid=46329350c27778811ce6eb66a649412d&action=click
I think we are talking about completely different markets in terms of what Wiliams is offering. Novoflex copy stands parts ain't cheap new either. Nor some of their competing stands. Volume users are looking for new... rather than cobbling stuff together off ebay. That's the institutional market. And compared to the commercial scanners of yore, I'd imagine even the DT unit which assumes a Phase One MF camera would be cheap and involve less technical talent to run the thing.
From what I've seen FT's sold about 60-plus units. Likely small institutions. Larger would either have the budget to farm it out or to pursue the DT type unit they might also use for books. DSLR speed has a lot to offer. Even artist rates of $120 an hour would recapture the cost in no time. Could the whole have been made out of high impact plastic? Sure. Probably for a 10th the cost but you'd have to have a lot more volume. Says the unit is machined and assembled in Nova Scotia. Transport is going to run something. I'd imagine that at the end of the day, he's not making a lot on these things. Again, 10 units of profit on a 100 unit production run... and all at the back end.
Price relative to used copy stands is high. Ditto for stuff you pull together yourself. Comparing that to a commercial product is unrealistic. Marketing issue in my view is that the full cost includes your DSLR, a light source, etc. so even at the price, it depends on stuff you already own... and I think the folks who are going to see the logic are already well down the road of having most of the pieces themselves. Make or Buy leaves the "Buy" option less compelling. For example, here is Kaiser's "Copylizer eVision" product, and it goes a long way toward making Film Toaster's insane price look pretty rational: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/168161-REG/Kaiser_205212_Copylizer_eVision_Com_pact_Copy.html
FWIW, part of what drew me back to film was to get out of the electronic upgrade cycle the camera companies seem to be running mostly to their benefit. That may be over as we plateau, but I thought it a real turn off. That said, photography is a gear intensive avocation, and from what I can see, the only thing Mr. Williams has done here is try to offer what seems increasingly reasonable price relative to similar products packaging the same solution. It's not even that out of line relative some of the prices of higher end tripods out there. Can you build your own tripod? Sure. Can you get by with something less than high end graphite?
Sure. And FT is a dedicated use - read small market, so there's that and small market's usuall cost more. I do think it's a tad unfair to make this guy out as if he's the villain or emblematic of the villainy of photographic companies out there. Really? Compared to Phase One? He's the bad guy? He's a photographer in his 80's and offering a solution of the sort he worked out for himself, and it's not a bad one from some of the video reviews. If it didn't work, that'd be one thing. No one has said that.
I think we are talking about completely different markets in terms of what Wiliams is offering. Novoflex copy stands parts ain't cheap new either. Nor some of their competing stands. Volume users are looking for new... rather than cobbling stuff together off ebay. That's the institutional market. And compared to the commercial scanners of yore, I'd imagine even the DT unit which assumes a Phase One MF camera would be cheap and involve less technical talent to run the thing.
From what I've seen FT's sold about 60-plus units. Likely small institutions. Larger would either have the budget to farm it out or to pursue the DT type unit they might also use for books. DSLR speed has a lot to offer. Even artist rates of $120 an hour would recapture the cost in no time. Could the whole have been made out of high impact plastic? Sure. Probably for a 10th the cost but you'd have to have a lot more volume. Says the unit is machined and assembled in Nova Scotia. Transport is going to run something. I'd imagine that at the end of the day, he's not making a lot on these things. Again, 10 units of profit on a 100 unit production run... and all at the back end.
Price relative to used copy stands is high. Ditto for stuff you pull together yourself. Comparing that to a commercial product is unrealistic. Marketing issue in my view is that the full cost includes your DSLR, a light source, etc. so even at the price, it depends on stuff you already own... and I think the folks who are going to see the logic are already well down the road of having most of the pieces themselves. Make or Buy leaves the "Buy" option less compelling. For example, here is Kaiser's "Copylizer eVision" product, and it goes a long way toward making Film Toaster's insane price look pretty rational: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/168161-REG/Kaiser_205212_Copylizer_eVision_Com_pact_Copy.html
FWIW, part of what drew me back to film was to get out of the electronic upgrade cycle the camera companies seem to be running mostly to their benefit. That may be over as we plateau, but I thought it a real turn off. That said, photography is a gear intensive avocation, and from what I can see, the only thing Mr. Williams has done here is try to offer what seems increasingly reasonable price relative to similar products packaging the same solution. It's not even that out of line relative some of the prices of higher end tripods out there. Can you build your own tripod? Sure. Can you get by with something less than high end graphite?
Sure. And FT is a dedicated use - read small market, so there's that and small market's usuall cost more. I do think it's a tad unfair to make this guy out as if he's the villain or emblematic of the villainy of photographic companies out there. Really? Compared to Phase One? He's the bad guy? He's a photographer in his 80's and offering a solution of the sort he worked out for himself, and it's not a bad one from some of the video reviews. If it didn't work, that'd be one thing. No one has said that.
Similar threads
