the price of film...

[mh2000]

I have been shooting BW400CN almost exclusivly (in 35mm) for the last 2 years, great film for scanning and machine prints IMO. I couldn't make up my mind for a while and shot 50/50 it and XP2 Super, but since I can get local 3-packs for $10-12 and XP2 Super must be ordered in my town... just standardized on the BW400CN. I think in general the Kodak is finer grained and richer tones, but the XP2 is a little sharper. The BW400CN is also a faster film. The difference I found was that to shoot XP2 Super at 400 I had to carefully expose for my shadows or they would go to crap, but with BW400CN I can just shoot at 400 with averaged metering and the latitude always covers me.

(I also feel sorry for Kodak... and appreciate that they recently updated TMY came out with a new color film).

>>anyone have more recent experience with the kodak film?

 

[Pherdinand]

the "price" of (using) film

Five rolls of e100 gx in 220 format needed "professional" developing (i.e. more expensive), not being regular size but double long. Result, all rolls have a few spots where the film looks weird shiny-sticky and where it was stuck on the plastic envelope thing they put the slide strips in. This was in the summer.
And now, since 2 weeks they cannot find another slide film of mine. The lab processed it and then it disappeared. There were two rolls; one came back when it was promised, the second one is gone.
One would think,with reduced demand such mistakes would not happen, but it's not the case.

Film is not that expensive, as long as there's a reliable lab to develop it...
Or shall i be assimilated and buy a dslr.

 

[back alley]

i shoot xp2 at 200 normally and meter as per my usual also.

finer grain and richer tones but not as sharp, good info - many thanks.

the kodak is cheaper here in the 3 pack also, 3 for 12 bucks (cdn) but the ebay stuff is still cheaper.

joe

 

[back alley]

the "price" of (using) film

Five rolls of e100 gx in 220 format needed "professional" developing (i.e. more expensive), not being regular size but double long. Result, all rolls have a few spots where the film looks weird shiny-sticky and where it was stuck on the plastic envelope thing they put the slide strips in. This was in the summer.
And now, since 2 weeks they cannot find another slide film of mine. The lab processed it and then it disappeared. There were two rolls; one came back when it was promised, the second one is gone.
One would think,with reduced demand such mistakes would not happen, but it's not the case.

Film is not that expensive, as long as there's a reliable lab to develop it...
Or shall i be assimilated and buy a dslr.

i have a very good mini lab close by, i get the film developed, low res scans and no prints. no problems yet.

get the dslr also, great fun to play with.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

i have a very good mini lab close by, i get the film developed, low res scans and no prints. no problems yet.

More or less what I do, but I get hires scans (about 3300 x 2200). Why do you go for lowres?

 

[KenD]

About 2 years ago a lot of short dated and outdated XP2 in 100' rolls was selling very cheaply on the main auction place, along with a lot of regular B&W. I haven't seen bulk XP2 in quite a while. So yes, XP2 has gotten more expensive. A lot more expensive. However, there are a number of options (Arista, Ultrafine, 5222, ..) for soup-it-yourself B&W that are, as far as film goes, cheap.

 

[Erik L]

whats a good price for velvia 50, in 35 or 120 size

 

[back alley]

More or less what I do, but I get hires scans (about 3300 x 2200). Why do you go for lowres?

low res is cheaper.
if i have a neg that i want to print then i scan it myself at a higher res.
joe

 

[bcostin]

Cheaper would be better, but it's not so bad. These days most of my film photography is self-developed B&W. I generally buy Arista branded stuff in bulk 35mm and in 120. When I first got started I used cheap, somewhat expired bulk film from ebay but it's gotten harder to find, and what does show up is usually almost as much as I'd spend on fresh film anyway. Most of the what color I do is also bulk-loaded, and developed process-only atl Target or Walmart. I seldom get prints, since everything gets scanned at home.

I noticed something interesting lately on this topic. I've been scanning a bunch of old family negatives and slides, most of which are still filed away in their original processing envelopes, complete with the amount charged stamped on the front. The prices from the 70's and 80's really don't seem that much lower to me that what I pay at a local minilab, especially not for negatives with prints. The film prices may have been lower, of course.