# Film photography expensive



## Giles (May 18, 2006)

I have a nice camera that i got from my dad. It's a pentax K1000. I love using it and it gives me so much freedom. But I hate manual for one reason:
It's soo damn expensive.
I have ony developed one film and the budget is prettty sad:
200 ASA 35mm Film - $3.85
Development(no prints, picture CD) - $10.92
This has been converted from $NZ to $US.

Is this pretty normal. I guess I could try supplying a CD for them, but I doubt it would make much difference. I know that I can get film for about $NZ4 each in packs of 10 from the net. but i don't want to buy film if it's going to cost that much to develop. I'm not really interested in developing myself.


----------



## stingray (May 18, 2006)

find a place that will develop it cheaper.. here in Australia a can get a friend to get it done at his local consumer lab for AUS$2.50 a roll, that's for colour.. and if i want it done professional it's 7 dollars.. 11 dollars US is terrible... even if i get mine done  at a  chemist it's only 6 dollars for dev and prints of a 24 exp. Find yourself a place that does it cheaper and as for film, either buy it at the supermarket if you want cheap stuff or find a pro photo place that has nice stuff.


----------



## Giles (May 18, 2006)

Maybe the conversions aren't quite right...I'm using the Dashboard Widget that translates the currency.

I guess I could check out some other establishments. The Kodak printshop cost me $NZ17 for no prints just a CD and the film oinly had 20 exp on it. I tried a chemist which sent them away and then gave them back to you and they saud I had to get prints and it would cost $20 for prints and a CD. There is a fuji lab but apart from that thats all.

Film isn't much of a problem, one of my friends dad is a pro photographer and I could probably make some sort of deal to get soime through him (he gets pro film for around $3).

Thanks for the tips and advice.


----------



## Torus34 (May 18, 2006)

If every frame on a roll resulted in a 'keeper' -- that is, a print good enough to hang on the wall -- cost would not be a problem, right?  It's all those poor, mediocre or 'almost keeper' frames that up the cost. 

So, here are some ways to reduce the cost per keeper.

First, think carefully before you push that button on the top of the camera.  Do you think the print will be good enough to hang on the wall?  If so, go ahead and push.  If not, consider how to improve the shot or look around for a different subject.  This will ultimately result in more 'keepers' per roll.  It will also improve your compositional abilities.

Second, consider B&W.  You can rig for film development and contact printing for a reasonable cost.  This will allow you to pick out those frames you want to have printed [the 'keepers.']


----------



## tasman (May 18, 2006)

You could invest in a digital camera, no film, just download to your computer and print what you want. But what it costs for a good digital camera and the cost of ink for a printer you can shoot a lot of rolls of film. 

Thats my view on the costs of film. One option might be just to develope the negatives and print the pictures that you want later.

I have a film scanner for 35MM negatives so I just get the negatives only when I take my film in. It generally costs me about $4 CDN.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 18, 2006)

All of the above are true and I add nothing to it but to say if it were free it would be digital (spit)


----------



## Don Simon (May 18, 2006)

I agree with what's already been said. If you want to stick with 35mm, buying your own film scanner and scanning the film is a good idea. You're still paying for film, but processing is cheap if you ask for no prints, and then you can decide what you want printed. I think the image quality of my scanned 35mm film is better than the shots from my 7-megapixel point and shoot digital. I'd get better quality with a 6mp digital SLR, but then that would cost me a good £500, for which I can buy quite a lot of film. Buying your own scanner will also almost certainly get you higher resolution images than the ones you're getting from the shop.


----------



## yoursatellite (May 18, 2006)

Another reason the exodus from film has been so rapid.  Normally I'm one to make an argument for old technology but I have a difficult time making one for film anymore.  This coming from a person with decades worth of professional darkroom experience who's trade is now about obsolete.  I should be teed off but I find that for my own work I can get so much more done with digital then with film.

cheers
Helen


----------



## benhasajeep (May 19, 2006)

From the way it looks you are spending most of your money on the CDs.  

Here in the states I send my regular c-41 color film to a kodak lab through a wholesale club.  Developing and 24 3 1/2 x 5 prints are only $2.74

If I have one I want to share I can scan them on my scanner.  For the price your paying for about 15 cds you can pick up a decent scanner and scan the ones you want.  I have also noticed alot of people complain about the cd's from the developers.  They don't scan to that high of quality.

I would look into getting your own scanner and not give up on film!


----------



## Naturegirl (May 19, 2006)

Torus34 said:
			
		

> First, think carefully before you push that button on the top of the camera. Do you think the print will be good enough to hang on the wall? If so, go ahead and push. If not, consider how to improve the shot or look around for a different subject. This will ultimately result in more 'keepers' per roll. It will also improve your compositional abilities.


 
Ditto. I'm one of those refusing to go digital and really don't beat myself up about the expense. There's just such a difference in the print quality of each and I always notice it. On the computer screen digital can be really nice, but on print, I just haven't seen anything comparable to film.....yet; so the expense is worth it to me. I'll probably be the last person on earth clutching onto the last roll of film in existence when everyone else is standing around taking pictures of me with their digital's  .

That said, I really take my time when shooting anything......except my 22 month old twin boys. Most every roll I shoot is about 95% keepable; not necessarily to hang on the wall but good for something. I'd love to have my own stock photo company some day so I'm sure most everything I have could be added to that collection


----------



## terri (May 19, 2006)

_Photography_ is expensive - period.  

You're either spending a boatload of money on the latest and greatest digital camera, memory cards, printer, ink cartridges, paper (or paying someone else to do it to your specifications) or you're spending a boatload of money buying film, scanner, and ongoing processing costs. 

It's gonna get ya, either way. Don't forget either camera will be nagging you for quality lenses, too. :heart: 

I just bought a medium format camera and will be one of those freaks arm-wrestling Naturegirl up there for that last roll of film.  It's just personal preference, plus it suits the alternative processes I do - not to mention I love the darkroom. 

I don't even ask myself if digital would be cheaper, because I know I'd find a way to drop big bucks there, too. It's gonna get ya no matter what!


----------



## ThomThomsk (May 19, 2006)

Naturegirl said:
			
		

> I'll probably be the last person on earth clutching onto the last roll of film in existence when everyone else is standing around taking pictures of me with their digital's





			
				terri said:
			
		

> I just bought a medium format camera and will be one of those freaks arm-wrestling Naturegirl up there for that last roll of film


Note to self: go and buy padlock for the film and paper freezer, ASAP.


----------



## benhasajeep (May 19, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> Note to self: go and buy padlock for the film and paper freezer, ASAP.


 
I am thinking of the same. :mrgreen:  Have a fresh full case of 120 velvia 100, and about 200 rolls of 135 film right in plain site in the fridge.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 19, 2006)

Guys Guys Guys just think chinese


----------



## terri (May 19, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> Note to self: go and buy padlock for the film and paper freezer, ASAP.


muahahahahaha


----------



## Irminsul (May 19, 2006)

I'm a bit depressed by all this forecasting of the fast drying up of films supplies.  But you guys should know... I've just taken the opposite road myself: after shooting digital, I've bought but haven't yet received an Elan 7n.  This is for a photography course that I'm going to take in the summer in the local college.  They want to start everyone out with film.  So, we're supposed to bring a film camera, film and paper.  Any suggestions regarding what brand and ISO level I should choose?  I guess we'll be doing a lot of outdoor shooting.  Also, you guys who recommend buying a scanner for negatives, any suggestions as to scanner models I should consider?


----------



## terri (May 19, 2006)

Irminsul said:
			
		

> I'm a bit depressed by all this forecasting of the fast drying up of films supplies. But you guys should know... I've just taken the opposite road myself: after shooting digital, I've bought but haven't yet received an Elan 7n. This is for a photography course that I'm going to take in the summer in the local college. They want to start everyone out with film. So, we're supposed to bring a film camera, film and paper. Any suggestions regarding what brand and ISO level I should choose? I guess we'll be doing a lot of outdoor shooting. Also, you guys who recommend buying a scanner for negatives, any suggestions as to scanner models I should consider?


Don't be depressed. Film is going to be around for many moons. There are still millions of analog shooters out there, as you are discovering by being encouraged to start with film. These are interesting times, as the big players sort things out. 

You weren't told whether to buy print film or slide film? Might want to check on that first. In my photo 101 class we were shooting nothing but ISO 100 slide film, so our images could be easily viewed at class. But everyone works differently.

Ok, enough hijacking of this thread.  Start a new thread asking about scanner models, okay?


----------



## ThomThomsk (May 20, 2006)

Irminsul said:
			
		

> I'm a bit depressed by all this forecasting of the fast drying up of films supplies.



Don't worry, film will be available for decades, probably for ever. However, we may not always have the huge range of films and papers you can buy today (I've counted at least 30 kinds of b&w film and probably the same again of paper), so if you are happy with a particular combination then it is only prudent to stockpile. Lots of Agfa fans wish they had, and it was a close run thing for Ilford a while back.

Incidentally, one of the directors of Ilford is a member of APUG, and he said the other day that around 50% of their sales are to students. If the universities ever stop teaching traditional methods then things could get interesting.


----------



## Irminsul (May 20, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> Don't worry, film will be available for decades, probably for ever. However, we may not always have the huge range of films and papers you can buy today (I've counted at least 30 kinds of b&w film and probably the same again of paper), so if you are happy with a particular combination then it is only prudent to stockpile. Lots of Agfa fans wish they had, and it was a close run thing for Ilford a while back.
> 
> Incidentally, one of the directors of Ilford is a member of APUG, and he said the other day that around 50% of their sales are to students. If the universities ever stop teaching traditional methods then things could get interesting.


 
Thanks, good to know.  Coincidentally, I've just ordered some Ilford (I love b&w photos).  I guess I'll order some more.  That was a shock about Agfa, one of the earliest pioneers in color photography.


----------



## selmerdave (May 20, 2006)

I predict 15 or 20 years of people wowing about the sharpness of their digital images, accompanied by the by-in-large extinction of the large film manufacturers, followed by a "renaissance" when people who care start to realize that there are other qualites aside from sharpness and perceived detail that affect the impact of the image.  Some photographers will "realize" that despite 20 years of development of digital technology, there are life-like qualities and a warmth to film images that get lost in digital.  There will sprout up various "boutique" (read 'expensive') film manufacturers and it will be a cottage industry.  Some who stood by film the whole time will say "I told you so..." but for the most part the public as a whole will have no concept of the potential of film.

Sorry, but my other hobby is audio, and the comparison of today in photography and about 1984 in audio (think advent of the CD and digital audio) is very relevant IMO.  Same arguments, same comparisons, same advantages and disadvantages, I expect the same sequence of events.

Dave


----------



## Irminsul (May 21, 2006)

selmerdave said:
			
		

> Sorry, but my other hobby is audio, and the comparison of today in photography and about 1984 in audio (think advent of the CD and digital audio) is very relevant IMO. Same arguments, same comparisons, same advantages and disadvantages, I expect the same sequence of events.
> 
> Dave


 
You read my mind!  Also an audiophile here, of eclectic tastes in music, and the comparison has suggested itself to my mind.  When I play some of my vinyl records (whether classic or rock) I can feel a vibrant warmth in the sound (never mind some pops and crackles from old records) that is miissing from the sharper digital remasterings.  Analogue is a mirror, while digital is a bit of counterfeit reality.  But, I guess, as the practicality of digital technologies replaces the warmth of analogue, much of this traditional warmth will be lost, to be missed only by those who remember it.  Until someone "rediscovers" it, as you prophesy.  But most won't care, as too much time and effort is saved by the digital format in all of these fields.  But something is being lost.  Hope I don't sound like old fogey.


----------



## Rolleistef (May 21, 2006)

You'd be getting mad if only you saw the prices here in France.
b&w : from 4 to 6.5 a 36 roll (hm 5.2 to 8$), from 10 to 20 process and printing. (12 to 24$).
Idem for colour.
It's why I process my bw film myself, but I haven't bought that marvellous Jobo machine for colour....


----------

