Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Film / Developing / Chemistry (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=105)
-   -   Kodak to raise prices (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170109)

Waus 11-29-2019 07:57

Kodak to raise prices
 
In 2020 Kodak will raise film prices:
https://kamerastore.com/breaking-new...-2020-jan-1st/
:mad

zuiko85 11-29-2019 08:16

Not a surprise. Prices going up everywhere for most every thing.

benlees 11-29-2019 08:21

Where I live Ilford is already substantially cheaper than Kodak. The quality is about the same so... If you only use colour film then Fuji is cheaper... I see a pattern developing...

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 09:35

Bunch of greedy morons announcing price increase on Black Friday.

Jamie123 11-29-2019 09:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2926680)
Bunch of greedy morons announcing price increase on Black Friday.

Why? Because Black Friday is a sacred day in the Capitalist religion?

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the price increases at all, but I also don't give a damn about when they announce it.

Jamie123 11-29-2019 10:07

Basically, what they seem to be saying is that demand has increased rapidly and they can't keep up with their supply. So from a purely (albeit simplistic) economic standpoint it sort of makes sense that they would increase the prices.

I'm really bummed about this as I already go through approximately $1000 worth of Kodak color film a year so any price increase is going to hit me hard. I'll probably place a big order soon, before the price increases hit the stores but even that will at most cover me for another year. Oh well.

Ronald M 11-29-2019 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie123 (Post 2926684)
Basically, what they seem to be saying is that demand has increased rapidly and they can't keep up with their supply. So from a purely (albeit simplistic) economic standpoint it sort of makes sense that they would increase the prices.

I'm really bummed about this as I already go through approximately $1000 worth of Kodak color film a year so any price increase is going to hit me hard. I'll probably place a big order soon, before the price increases hit the stores but even that will at most cover me for another year. Oh well.

Frozen film lasts a long time.

Ronald M 11-29-2019 10:44

I am back to using up some TM 100 & 400 that has an exp date 2005. Frozen and still good. I am switching to printing where you use two filters, 0 & 5 or 2 & 4 with V35 and multigrade filter module.

I do not use much film and will go back to Ilford.

Color is all digital. Capture One and a pro printer for prints

Chriscrawfordphoto 11-29-2019 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by benlees (Post 2926662)
Where I live Ilford is already substantially cheaper than Kodak. The quality is about the same so... If you only use colour film then Fuji is cheaper... I see a pattern developing...




In the US, Kodak is significantly cheaper.


Example:
Kodak Tmax 400, 36 exposure is $5.79 at B&H.


Ilford Delta 400, 36 exposure is $7.49 at B&H.


This pattern holds at every American retailer I have seen. Both are excellent films, and some people prefer one or the other; but if price is your main concern, then the Kodak film is the best buy.

CharlesDAMorgan 11-29-2019 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto (Post 2926689)
In the US, Kodak is significantly cheaper.


Example:
Kodak Tmax 400, 36 exposure is $5.79 at B&H.


Ilford Delta 400, 36 exposure is $7.49 at B&H.


This pattern holds at every American retailer I have seen. Both are excellent films, and some people prefer one or the other; but if price is your main concern, then the Kodak film is the best buy.

And on this side of the pond, unsurprisingly Ilford is normally cheaper. I do love Kodak black and white films but there is a limit to the mark up over European alternatives that I will pay. But on colour, Kodak cannot currently meet demand, so price rises were inevitable.

Mackinaw 11-29-2019 11:09

Mirko Boddecker, of Adox, has been saying for sometime now that film is too cheap with too little profit margin and that prices need to be a bit higher. So I'm not surprised that Kodak is raising prices.

Jim B.

Jamie123 11-29-2019 11:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronald M (Post 2926687)
Frozen film lasts a long time.

That's true, but it's more a question of how big of an order I can afford to make at once from an economical point of view. I have a tiny freezer so that's not really an option anyways.

Rayt 11-29-2019 12:05

Just keep making the stuff. I’ll pay.

benlees 11-29-2019 12:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto (Post 2926689)
In the US, Kodak is significantly cheaper.


Example:
Kodak Tmax 400, 36 exposure is $5.79 at B&H.


Ilford Delta 400, 36 exposure is $7.49 at B&H.


This pattern holds at every American retailer I have seen. Both are excellent films, and some people prefer one or the other; but if price is your main concern, then the Kodak film is the best buy.




Interesting. At the local: Tri X 24 exposure is $11.40, and HP5+ in 24 exposure is $7.20 CDN


However, Kodak P3200 is $0.20 per roll cheaper than the Ilford Delta 3200...

zuiko85 11-29-2019 12:47

ITime to dust off the Pen F (film) camera.
Our own forum member Eric shows what is possible with half frame 35.
To bad there is no one ( or no market large enough) to produce a modern updated 35mm half frame SLR with a basic 5 or 6 prime selection of lenses.

Keith 11-29-2019 13:01

Twelve dollars for a 36 exp roll of Tri-X here at the moment.

Rayt 11-29-2019 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith (Post 2926708)
Twelve dollars for a 36 exp roll of Tri-X here at the moment.

Is this from the dealer mark up or import duty?

IIIg 11-29-2019 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto (Post 2926689)
In the US, Kodak is significantly cheaper.


Example:
Kodak Tmax 400, 36 exposure is $5.79 at B&H.


Ilford Delta 400, 36 exposure is $7.49 at B&H.


This pattern holds at every American retailer I have seen. Both are excellent films, and some people prefer one or the other; but if price is your main concern, then the Kodak film is the best buy.


It might be worth the time to check film prices at Unique Photo in NJ. They often beat B&H, and Ilford film often is slightly less expensive than Kodak at Unique. I usually buy at least 25 rolls at a time.

I'm glad that I restocked my film supply two weeks ago.

Keith 11-29-2019 13:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rayt (Post 2926709)
Is this from the dealer mark up or import duty?



It can't be duty because we don't have an industry here to protect so it has to be mark up. And that price is from an online store called Vanbar Imaging ... one of the largest outlets in Oz. Film has always been stupidly expensive here ... a roll of HP5 is a dollar less.

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 14:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie123 (Post 2926682)
Why? Because Black Friday is a sacred day in the Capitalist religion?

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the price increases at all, but I also don't give a damn about when they announce it.

Did you ever lived as regular citizen in socialism or you are campus Starbucks social warrior ?

I lived through it. We have to stay inline for hours, or pay more to speculants or buy available garbage. It was multiple choice with commies. For regulars.
I embrace capitalism because my choice is truly multiple.
My current company gave me BF discount code and we saved 40% on outwear which only high ranked commies kids had.

To me increasing price at BF on product I use is like vomiting on opera stage. Act of morons.

davidnewtonguitars 11-29-2019 14:52

I'll get even, just raise the price on the stuff I do and sell.

traveler_101 11-29-2019 14:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mackinaw (Post 2926697)
Mirko Boddecker, of Adox, has been saying for sometime now that film is too cheap with too little profit margin and that prices need to be a bit higher. So I'm not surprised that Kodak is raising prices.

Clearly, prices are going to go up as the firms still in the business reckon with the costs of redeveloping film production at a smaller volume. BUT . . . some people are already paying out their backsides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by benlees (Post 2926706)
Interesting. At the local: Tri X 24 exposure is $11.40, and HP5+ in 24 exposure is $7.20 CDN

Oh Canada - these are just outrageous prices.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith (Post 2926708)
Twelve dollars for a 36 exp roll of Tri-X here at the moment.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph . . . hope your wages sustain that kind of price.

traveler_101 11-29-2019 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2926726)
Did you ever lived as regular citizen in socialism or you are campus Starbucks social warrior ?

I lived through it. We have to stay inline for hours, or pay more to speculants or buy available garbage. It was multiple choice with commies. For regulars.
I embrace capitalism because my choice is truly multiple.
My current company gave me BF discount code and we saved 40% on outwear which only high ranked commies kids had.

To me increasing price at BF on product I use is like vomiting on opera stage. Act of morons.

Oh come on, Ko.Fe, was it really that bad? LOL I am just curious: what kind of film did you get in the Soviet era? Did you get the Czech products - Foma?

Larry Cloetta 11-29-2019 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by traveler_101 (Post 2926729)


Oh Canada - these are just outrageous prices.



Jesus, Mary and Joseph . . . hope your wages sustain that kind of price.

It’s barely more than 30 cents a shot. 30 cents, not $30. Photography is still one of the world’s least expensive hobbies, or can be. Film is more than it was, still pretty cheap, and the cheaper stuff is dirt cheap if Kodak proves too dear.

traveler_101 11-29-2019 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta (Post 2926732)
It’s barely more than 30 cents a shot. 30 cents, not $30. Photography is still one of the world’s least expensive hobbies, or can be. Film is more than it was, still pretty cheap, and the cheaper stuff is dirt cheap if Kodak proves too dear.

I am not arguing against using film - not at all. I use film - sparingly - but I love it and am willing to pay for it. I have to deal with a tariff barrier here in Norway, but Foma sells locally and is very reasonable. Adox from Germany - can get small quantities shipped here at a reasonable price - or buy it from Fotoimpex in Berlin and bring it back. Kodak - I bring it back on my trips to the states.

My only point was that prices in some places are unreasonable.

Keith 11-29-2019 15:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta (Post 2926732)
It’s barely more than 30 cents a shot. 30 cents, not $30. Photography is still one of the world’s least expensive hobbies, or can be. Film is more than it was, still pretty cheap, and the cheaper stuff is dirt cheap if Kodak proves too dear.



Thirty cents a shot sounds terrific but after that thirty cents all I have is a 24 by 36mm square of nothing until I develop it ... and then if I want an actual photograph I have to scan or print.

I'm also not arguing against the use of film but to me these days that is not a cheap thing to do!

Phil_F_NM 11-29-2019 16:00

Just buy expired film if the current price is too high. Or pay a student to place an order from the Kodak student store but all you're going to get is EK5222 but it's definitely not $.30 an image.
I'm not yet broke but I'm also pretty poor. I currently have 800 feet of 35mm black and white, and over 2000 feet of 16mm black and white. Didn't cost me that much to accrue all that either, less than $300, because I'm a smart shopper and look for deals on expired film or use my student discount when I can afford to buy new film.
Phil Forrest

Larry Cloetta 11-29-2019 16:20

It’s possible that I have the wrong attitude. Maybe, if we enjoy film photography, maybe it’s emotionally misleading to compare the price of a roll of film to “what it used to be”, and better instead to measure $12 against one’s net income for the year, because that’s the real yardstick which should determine whether film at $12 is “affordable” or not.
If someone is shooting 30-50 rolls a month, that’s one thing, but for those shooting, say, 3 rolls, 100 shots, 3 exposures every day, it’s $36 a month. For a hobby that can bring as much satisfaction as photography, still seems really inexpensive to me. When I was making $1.40/hour I am not sure film felt a lot cheaper to me than it does now, but I bought it anyway.
Home economics is always about choices, but there’s not much one would need to give up to scrape together $36 a month.
Film cameras are cheaper than dirt, as well, literally. Try pricing what it costs to have a load of fill dirt delivered. Golf, fishing, sailing, horses, bowling, most every hobby is more expensive than film photography is all I am saying.
Nobody needs to look at it the way I do, certainly.

Bob Michaels 11-29-2019 16:24

So the price of film is going up. That has been continually happening for at least the 50 years I can remember. So is the price of everything else as well as salaries and wages. Did anyone expect the price of film to remain constant while everything else increased?

Who shoots so much film that you cannot compensate simply by eating a lower cost lunch a few days a week?

I remember the same moans and groans with a 30 meter tin of HP5+ (18 36 exposure rolls) went from US$19.95 to $21.95 back some 40 odd years ago. And photographers kept on shooting.

Let's put this into perspective.

Prest_400 11-29-2019 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta (Post 2926740)
Golf, fishing, sailing, horses, bowling, most every hobby is more expensive than film photography is all I am saying.
Nobody needs to look at it the way I do, certainly.

I do often think about the increases, as I am currently a grad student without much income and thus quite sensitive to it. However, the smaller amounts I shoot are worth it, and finding a way.
I do mostly shoot BW Ilford currently, and in Europe it has uniform distribution and great pricing.

On top of what you said, photography is quite cheap for being a great way to stop time and making a picture that lasts. And it complements other activities. Many other hobbies are just ephemeral amd consumed.

I recently printed off some TriX I shoot as a teen, and having the image on paper of a late beloved person is hard to price. If something I even appreciate my past self for pushing thru $ limits, got that Kodachrome and TriX and shoot what I did.

nickthetasmaniac 11-29-2019 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by benlees (Post 2926662)
Where I live Ilford is already substantially cheaper than Kodak. The quality is about the same so... If you only use colour film then Fuji is cheaper... I see a pattern developing...

That’s interesting. In Aus Kodak is generally cheaper than Ilford for B&W, and Portra400 is quite a bit cheaper than P400H for colour...

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by traveler_101 (Post 2926730)
Oh come on, Ko.Fe, was it really that bad? LOL I am just curious: what kind of film did you get in the Soviet era? Did you get the Czech products - Foma?

Short answer: it was no foma (who needs bw made in USSR, but ORWO (slide), at least in Moscow.

Bad? Is it self lobotomy or lack of the common knowledge :bang:
In fat on (and just because of tiny population) oil Norway which escaped deadly communism (due to different nature on nation) you just can't image to have needle with liquid food inserted to you soft tissues in your month just because you are on the starving strike due to non agreement with fake communism. And it was considered as soft time. In hard time people were jailed and killed due to the quota. It was golden times of communism.
Wanna be where?

Read this:
https://www.nybooks.com/articles/197...imir-bukovsky/

Pál_K 11-29-2019 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie123 (Post 2926684)
Basically, what they seem to be saying is that demand has increased rapidly and they can't keep up with their supply...

I truly hope demand is increasing - that would offer film manufacturers reason to keep developing and improving their products.



Quote:

Originally Posted by zuiko85 (Post 2926707)
ITime to dust off the Pen F (film) camera...

Those Olympus half frame cameras are seductive. I intended to go for a short walk with my Pen FT and surprised myself by making 72 exposures in a few hours. Got the prints back last week - stunningly good.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Rayt (Post 2926703)
Just keep making the stuff. I’ll pay.

My feelings as well, although these days in retirement I have to sacrifice by spending less on something else.

gavinlg 11-29-2019 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith (Post 2926708)
Twelve dollars for a 36 exp roll of Tri-X here at the moment.

10ish dollars for tri-x at walkens house of film Keith! Even Vanbar are ripping people off in Aus. Even worse in NZ.

https://walkens.com.au/product/tri-x-400-35mm/

Keith 11-30-2019 00:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by gavinlg (Post 2926775)
10ish dollars for tri-x at walkens house of film Keith! Even Vanbar are ripping people off in Aus. Even worse in NZ.

https://walkens.com.au/product/tri-x-400-35mm/



It's not really an issue for me thankfully ... if I get the urge I have 600ft of the stuff in my freezer! :p

nickthetasmaniac 11-30-2019 01:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM (Post 2926737)
Just buy expired film if the current price is too high.

Oddly enough expired film is often more expensive than fresh stock in the local market (even the same emulsions).

Trends are strange things...

Guy Pinhas 11-30-2019 01:31

I have been bulk loading for the last few years. Eastman, Foma and recently Orwo.

Foma is the more commercially available film, so here are my calculations: One bulk roll of 100ft will give me 18 rolls. So, initial investment not counted in, each 36 exposure roll costs me €2.38 as the bulk roll costs €43.00. Lucky me, I can deduct VAT meaning that the price prior to VAT is €36.00 which means that each roll of self spooled 36 exposures ends up costing me €2.00.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that both Orwo and Eastman are double the price of Foma. It's still 4-5 Euros per roll which is, IMHO, a great deal for great film!

I think you can easily find a new bulk loader anywhere between €50.00 and €70. On the used market it would be more along the €30.00 mark. Include some cassettes that cost €1.00 and you're good to go.

Of course this is 35mm and B&W so those are my two cents for exactly what they're worth: €0.02 :)

Jamie123 11-30-2019 02:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2926726)
Did you ever lived as regular citizen in socialism or you are campus Starbucks social warrior ?

I lived through it. We have to stay inline for hours, or pay more to speculants or buy available garbage. It was multiple choice with commies. For regulars.
I embrace capitalism because my choice is truly multiple.
My current company gave me BF discount code and we saved 40% on outwear which only high ranked commies kids had.

To me increasing price at BF on product I use is like vomiting on opera stage. Act of morons.

Standing in line for hours just to buy garbage? Sounds exactly like Black Friday to me. :D

Anyways, I don't feel like arguing about capitalism vs socialism as that wasn't the point I was making. The point was, Black Friday is just an arbitrary sales day. There's nothing sacred about it that should be respected.

Also, either you're translating proverbs from another language that don't work in English or you just make the worst similes ever. Vomiting on an opera stage? Why would that be an "act of morons"? Either it's part of the act in which case it makes narrative sense or the opera singer is ill in which case they're in need of medical attention and hardly deserve being called a moron.

Mooshoepork 11-30-2019 02:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by gavinlg (Post 2926775)
10ish dollars for tri-x at walkens house of film Keith! Even Vanbar are ripping people off in Aus. Even worse in NZ.

https://walkens.com.au/product/tri-x-400-35mm/

How is being 1-2 dollars more “ripping people off”?

One is a walk in retail store with overhead and the other is some uni students running it out of their mum’s house.

Cost price for dealers in Australia is pretty close to what they’re selling it at.

Edit; and it’s even cheaper at the other online retailers in Australia.

gavinlg 11-30-2019 03:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mooshoepork (Post 2926786)
How is being 1-2 dollars more “ripping people off”?

One is a walk in retail store with overhead and the other is some uni students running it out of their mum’s house.

Cost price for dealers in Australia is pretty close to what they’re selling it at.

Edit; and it’s even cheaper at the other online retailers in Australia.

Most retailers only lowered their prices when guys like ikigai and walkens starting selling film at competitive prices. I remember Michaels in Melbourne and camera house elsewhere selling Portra 400 for $25aud+ just 6-7 years ago, and when I asked why it was so expensive they told me film is dead and I should just buy a digital camera.
I've got little respect for most of the bigger brick/mortar photographic businesses in Australia for that kind of attitude. Vanbar isn't included here - they've always been pretty good. But I'm not paying more for the sake of them having a store, 2-3 dollars a roll is $30 when you buy 2 five packs.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 20:25.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.