giganova
Well-known
When I started photography in the 80s, you could get any film at any drugstore or corner market all over the world. And every town had a photo store where you could buy chemicals and they developed your film and made prints in one hour. So yeah, there were better times.
teddy
Jose Morales
Bring back PLUS-X. I've only got two rolls left in the freezer. Such a classic looking film with many good looking technical aspects. Love the grain, the tone, ease of use - bring THAT back.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Reality check:
1. Unless you have a time machine, you can't shoot film in the '90s.
2. You can shoot film now.
Conclusion: Now is the time to shoot film (if you want)
Ambro51 is right.
zuiko85
Veteran
Oh I dunno (warning, old fart opinion). I think the golden time to shoot film was the early 70's. Tri-X in 100ft. bulk and a box of 10 Kodak snap-caps for a $10.
Now, TX bulk is $100, and reloadable cassettes (which by all reports are junk) are $1.25 each....when they are available.
Back in the day (oh boy, here it comes, old fart reminiscing, telling the same story for the 50th time)
As I was saying...I've shot the whole 100ft in one day, with two Pen F half frames no less.
He did not say that NOW is the only time to shoot film because it is the only time we have, he said "There’s never been a better time to shoot film. I think that implies there's the entire history of film to compete against.
These are actually some very good points.
madNbad
Well-known
The video is discussing film users who were born into the digital age. They have no memory of Panatomic X with a leader long enough to load a Barnack or gas that was 29 cents a gallon. Film steps back from the immediacy of the digital age and that is the appeal. Learning and enjoying the process should be applauded and encouraged.
That is true... but that doesn't mean we cannot reminisce on our own pasts.
newsgrunt
Well-known
These are NOT the glory years for film no matter what things look like. Glory years for me included blue box Oriental paper, graded Zone VI Brilliant paper, Panatomic X and Ethol Blue. as for Kodachrome...I used it, I liked it, but please, let it remain dead.
giganova
Well-known
And yet, film prices are going up & up.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
And yet, film prices are going up & up.
Film has been a special niche item for a while now.
Unless they can sell it for high prices and make a good profit.. these few remaining film manufactures will wither away to zero.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
I bought a freezer and packed it with film years ago. Also good for hiding corpses for the mob.
Huss
Veteran
When I started photography in the 80s, you could get any film at any drugstore or corner market all over the world. And every town had a photo store where you could buy chemicals and they developed your film and made prints in one hour. So yeah, there were better times.
And almost all of those one hour places gave complete garbage results.
I remember being so disappointed so many times, no matter where I went, with the results I got back. But when I checked the negatives they looked fine.
It's actually why I started to shoot B&W as I would dev and print it myself.
Or shoot 'chromes as there was no 1 hour monkey to mess that up.
Archlich
Well-known
Everything's expensive now, from gear to film to processing.
Rich rich hobby it'll become in time.
Rich rich hobby it'll become in time.
Huss
Veteran
Is it though? Has anyone run those cheap 1980s film prices through an inflation calculator? I remember buying a roll of Kodachrome 64 in England for about 5 GBP when I was a kid.
That would be about 12 GBP now or about $16.
Guess what the price of Provia 100 is now? $16.
People just want cheap w/o accepting reality.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
It is only relatively affordable if one has a good paying job or is willing to make sacrifices in other spending for the sake of the film shooting hobby.
Today's gig economy and the slew of temporary and minimum wage jobs and high rents in big cities still makes it a bit of a luxury hobby to indulge in for many people these days.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Film photography is still affordable for me because I shoot b/w and do my own processing. But still, I don’t know about other people but I travel for my photos and the travel part cost the most money even if I decide to shoot slides and have it processed and scanned. It doesn’t necessarily need to be somewhere exotic just making a day of it in the city would involve other expenses.
markjwyatt
Well-known
IN 1957, a roll of 135-36 Tri-X was around $1.15. Money at that time came in 90% silver. Today, 90% silver coin is around $13.20/$1-face, so the TriX actually cost 1.15*13.20 = $15.18.
Try gasoline. Gas was around 25 cents in 1964 (probably the same in 1957).
0.25*$13.20 = $3.30 / gallon equivalent.
In "real" money (still valid today based on gasoline at least), film was MUCH more expensive in the 50s and 60s than today.
Archlich
Well-known
That's a very long run in which economy had gone through lots of up and downs. Just like Mark said above Tri-X back in the 1950's were quite a bit more expensive than they're today.
Yet in the more recent memories we'd been flooded with announcement of film price hikes (thank you, Is it though? Has anyone run those cheap 1980s film prices through an inflation calculator? I remember buying a roll of Kodachrome 64 in England for about 5 GBP when I was a kid.
That would be about 12 GBP now or about $16.
Guess what the price of Provia 100 is now? $16.
People just want cheap w/o accepting reality.[/QUOTE]
That's a very long run in which economy had gone through lots of up and downs. Just like Mark said above Tri-X back in the 1950's were quite a bit more expensive than they're today.
Yet in the more recent memories we'd been flooded with announcement of film price hikes (thank you, [URL="https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub-2246852236957917%3Adqfk044dsd4&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=fujifilm+increase&sa=Search"]Fujifilm). Looking at my own order history, HP5+ in 120 was $4.09 in September 2016 (bought 50 rolls from B&H). Now it's $5.49. I bought 40 bricks of 3-pack Superia X-tra 400 at $9.99 each last May. Now it's $11.99. I wonder if other goods in our life experience inflation of such rate as well.
Again, I was referring to not only increased price of film, but also gears and processing. No more are the local labs that does $3 a roll (at least to me). And how some of the cameras had became uber expensive...which we're all keenly aware of.
And yes, let there be no shame in saying that I'd like to have it "cheap". I'm not "refusing to accept" that $15 for a roll of Provia and another $15 for development is our reality. I'm just saying it's quite expensive, and there's a trend of it getting more so in time.
Huss
Veteran
Kodak, Fuji etc is not expected to subsidize their customers' lifestyles. That may sound harsh but the truth is their prices are NOT higher than back in the golden days when adjusted for inflation.
If someone is surviving on minimum wage then, just like at any time in history, perhaps film photography should not be a priority.
Or to put it bluntly, if you are broke how is that Kodak's fault?