The Cost of Shooting Film (Page 3): I'd expect a repsponse like this from you. In fact, while composing this post, you came to mind. However, not in a contributory manner. --Bob...

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I'd expect a repsponse like this from you. In fact, while composing this post, you came to mind. However, not in a contributory manner.
--Bob

User ID wrote:

No problem. 20k clicks on a top shelf camera is ne... (show quote)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I purchase film in bulk, 100 feet. The cost of that, currently, is $80.00. That will yield about 648 exposures. So, $80.00/648=$0.12. One needs to find ways of reducing personal costs in order to pursue their love.
--Bob

JFCoupe wrote:

The OP must be getting some great prices on film. I just took a quick look at B & H and film was starting at $8.19 for 36 exp and up to about $10.00. Using an approx. average of $9.00 per 36 exp, the cost is about .25 per frame. Then add chemical cost and I suspect the cost is probably closer to .30 per exposure.

The important factor in my mind is to use a camera system that works for the individual. Neither film or digital is right or wrong. It's a choice.

BebuLamar

GAS496 wrote:

How about $6.50 per negative to blow your minds? That is the cost for one sheet of 8x10 HP5 developed. The next three weeks has me in Utah and New Mexico exclusively for taking photographs. I was getting all my film holders loaded last night and my wife asked if 40 sheets will be enough to last. I looked at her and quipped if I shoot all that film I am going to be disappointed with myself. So why tell this story? Because we all have different loves and methods for creating our art.

I always wanted a view camera and even with 4x5 a sheet of Ektar 100 4x5 is $4.95 and processing not included. I used to shoot Portra 160 4x5 and it was only $1 a sheet.

GAS496 Loc: Arizona

BebuLamar wrote:

I always wanted a view camera and even with 4x5 a sheet of Ektar 100 4x5 is $4.95 and processing not included. I used to shoot Portra 160 4x5 and it was only $1 a sheet.

You should pursue your photography desires and get yourself a 4x5. I love the entire process especially the contemplative part when studying the image on the ground glass. 4x5 equipment and film is reasonably priced. Heck if you saw the post yesterday you could get a whole darkroom set up for next to nothing. I love the printing process too; the amber light, smell of the chemistry, and whir of the enlarger fans create a magical place. Oh yea, and the beautiful black and white images at the end of the process.

Tri-X 8x10 is easy $10 a sheet. Fifteen years ago when I first started shooting 8x10 you could buy it in boxes of 50 for a little over a hundred bucks. Now you can only get it in boxes of ten.

TucsonDave Loc: Tucson, Arizona

rmalarz wrote:

I purchase film in bulk, 100 feet. The cost of that, currently, is $80.00. That will yield about 648 exposures. So, $80.00/648=$0.12. One needs to find ways of reducing personal costs in order to pursue their love.
--Bob

No doubt there are a lot of accountants and/or finance people in UHH who will point out All the costs involved in producing an acceptable photograph. For instance, it seems that you have valued the time you spent developing the photo at $0.00. No cost has been factored in for the cost of film and time in taking enough photos to insure at least one acceptable photo.

So, its really a swampy area to enter when you use a title like "The Cost of Shooting Film". In the end, it doesn't matter since we all have our own, and in our minds, acceptable way to justify what we do. Just continue to enjoy what you do. You don't have to "cost justify" it. Cheers. By the way, we both have the same crusty old Welshman friend who lives in Chandler, AZ - Mike.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

You mentioned prices for chemicals, so I assume you do the work youself. But you did not figure the cost of darkroom gear. Which can add several thousands of dollars to the total cost. A well equipped darkroom, including plumbing, electrical, etc etc. building the room, can be very expensive. A 23Cll with a good lens can set you back about the same price as your D850 nikon

ELNikkor

An FM2 with a broken light meter, a 50mm f2 H Nikkor, and a roll of T-Max 100 + my darkroom...

BebuLamar

boberic wrote:

You mentioned prices for chemicals, so I assume you do the work youself. But you did not figure the cost of darkroom gear. Which can add several thousands of dollars to the total cost. A well equipped darkroom, including plumbing, electrical, etc etc. building the room, can be very expensive. A 23Cll with a good lens can set you back about the same price as your D850 nikon

Yes it costs a lot but the with darkroom there are so many things that you can do it yourself. Doesn't save much money but bring more fun to the process.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

rmalarz wrote:

There is an active discussion, ongoing at the mome... (show quote)

Digital is only less costly after you buy:

Camera
Lens(es)
Exposure reference target (optional)
Other accessories
Computer, keyboard, mouse/trackpad
Software
Monitor
Monitor calibration kit
Photo Printer (optional)
Education/training (necessary if you want quality and efficiency)

The whole cost issue is only a problem when you can’t afford it. But it’s possibly not the reason to use film OR digital imaging.

I have all the stuff of film photography — camera, flashes, lenses, filters, enlarger, easel, timers, tanks, reels, trays, safelights… But I haven’t used it since 2005.

Why?

It’s not because I don’t like the “look” of film images. It’s all about immediacy of use, speed of sharing and distribution, and versatility of use.

I’m currently digitizing my old film negatives, because otherwise, they’re just detritus in a drawer.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

CHG_CANON wrote:

Shooting 20,000 images in year 1 is reasonable in digital. After buying this leading edge camera, what is the year two cost in digital for the next 20k?

20,000 images in a year comes to over 50 images per day. I enjoy photography, but not to the extent where I'm spending most of the day looking through a viewfinder.

GAS496 Loc: Arizona

boberic wrote:

You mentioned prices for chemicals, so I assume you do the work youself. But you did not figure the cost of darkroom gear. Which can add several thousands of dollars to the total cost. A well equipped darkroom, including plumbing, electrical, etc etc. building the room, can be very expensive. A 23Cll with a good lens can set you back about the same price as your D850 nikon

Okay then what about the cost of a computer with enough speed and storage to edit and store files? Monthly software subscription costs. Printers, ink and paper. We can really get in the weeds on this. I believe Bob just wanted to give people an insight what it costs for film not start a debate.

Six years ago I bought a DeVere 8x10 enlarger another enlarger for 4x5 with lenses for all formats and complete darkroom setup with print washers, trays, drying cabinet, etc. for $1,800. The DeVere enlarger when new costed about $25,000.

If you saw the post here on UHH just yesterday people can’t even give away their entire darkroom setup including the enlarger you mention. Plus film cameras and most lenses are a lot cheaper to buy these days then digital gear. The great thing about photography in the 21st Century is the options it offers in pursuit of our art. From 19th Century techniques to cutting edge technology. What a great medium!

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

rook2c4 wrote:

20,000 images in a year comes to over 50 images per day. I enjoy photography, but not to the extent where I'm spending most of the day looking through a viewfinder.

I don't keep close enough track of my shooting to say my exact yearly usage, but 10,000 is just 10 x 1000-image shooting days, and I know 10-days is less than my shooting habit. About 1000 RAW images from my digital cameras fit on a single 32GB card, and I regularly shoot a card full for insects and wildlife (and multiple cards for airshows). I use multiple cameras so getting the combined total count is difficult to answer precisely. So actually, 20,000 is rather easy to achieve in a year for someone purchasing a top-tier camera and actively using it for all the possible shooting scenarios.

CusopDingle Loc: central CT

I take good care of my equipment. I’m on my 5th Powershot (G12, warranty placed G12, G1x/2, warranty replaced G1x2, now G1x/3) in just over a decade. My 50+/- year old Nikons don’t break and use magnificent relatively inexpensive glass. $100 pays for the CLA that nearly ensures the equipment will outlast me. And as “mature” tech, the risk of GAS costs are minimal.
Easy answer for me….but I shoot for the image and experience I want, not to try to minimize my costs….

BBurns Loc: South Bay, California

rmalarz wrote:

....... Chasing that new equipment is the only way some will ever achieve their dreams of becoming a good photographer. --Bob

So very true.

"Bad Carpenters Blame Their Tools"

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

To those who want to bring "hardware" into the discussion. I intentionally focused on consumables, and mentioned that in the initial post. The very reason for that was to limit the number of variables. Developing equipment can vary from around $100 to over $3000. I did not want to analyze every possible combination of hardware available, including the do-it-yourself resourceful individuals who would make their own. Additionally, it avoids remodeling houses, constructing/modifying rooms to use for a darkroom, etc.

So, for those who missed that statement in the original post, the discussion was focused on black and white film, developer, and fixer. These are common to anyone wishing to shoot and process their own photographic negative. It keeps things simple.
--Bob