Author Topic: Film and “sticker shock”  (Read 894 times)

John Robison

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Film and “sticker shock”
« on: February 05, 2020, 07:00:39 PM »
The trouble with getting old is you remember what everything used to cost. This recent post about P30 really brought this to light for me. It’s hard to realize that what I paid for 100ft of Tri-X in 1970 now buys 1 36X roll of 35mm.

Yeah, I know, I’m not adjusting for inflation and the ‘real’ price hasn’t gone up that much.....

But still, now well retired for several years, I really need to think long and hard about my film budget and how to stretch it.

Kai-san

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,559
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2020, 08:42:27 PM »
I suppose you've already thought about bulk loading as a way to cut film cost. For colour film; C41 or E6 there are very few options for bulk loading, at least in Europe. For B&W there are quite a few options, the one that stands out as the really low cost alternative is Fomapan. Their 100, 200 and 400 ISO films sells for half the price compared to Ilford, for example. I realize that Fomapan is not everybody's cup of tea, but different developers and timing can be used to control contrast and grain. There is also the option of buying bulk rolls of expired film, but they can sometimes be rather pricey depending on popularity.
Kai


If you want to change your photographs, you need to change cameras.

-- Nobuyoshi Araki


http://www.kaispage.net/

John Robison

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2020, 09:37:40 PM »
I suppose you've already thought about bulk loading as a way to cut film cost. For colour film; C41 or E6 there are very few options for bulk loading, at least in Europe. For B&W there are quite a few options, the one that stands out as the really low cost alternative is Fomapan. Their 100, 200 and 400 ISO films sells for half the price compared to Ilford, for example. I realize that Fomapan is not everybody's cup of tea, but different developers and timing can be used to control contrast and grain. There is also the option of buying bulk rolls of expired film, but they can sometimes be rather pricey depending on popularity.
Yes, I have. When I started out all I shot was bulk, the aforementioned Tri-X. Looked into it today and reloadable cartridges have very low customer confidence, with lots of problems reported. Haven’t bothered to save my factory loads so no ready source of empty used cartridges with film ends sticking out. In the US probably the best deal is Kentmere 100 or 400 at about $50 a pop. In my box-o-bits there are a few old agfa style metal reloadable cartridges, but having used them was never too thrilled with their quality either. And with extra handling the likelihood of film scratching is multiplied.

Fortunately I’m rather fond of half frame and have a couple of Pen F’s and Olympus vf type Pens. That right there cuts my 35mm cost in half. But you know us cheapskates, always looking for a better bargain.

Holy cats, I do sound like a whiner!

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,758
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2020, 10:33:42 PM »
I've been using reloadable cassettes for many years now and I can say they're not as bad as some people say.
I always spray some air in a can through the felt lips before loading the film. I also numbered my cassettes so that I can know when one fails, but so far everything has gone well. I tend to find loading the plastic cassettes easier but the metal ones are sturdier. I avoid dropping them just in case the open-up.

As for film, I've been using cheap Fomapan (actually sold under the Arista label) for many years now and can say that while it's not a gorgeous film, it does get the job done at a decent price. Just don't use some of the manufacturer recommended development times and you'll be OK.

Fomapan is one of those weird things. When you first look at it, you go "yuck!". Then you play around with development and you go "hey, this is not that bad!". Then you look at the cost and you go "I'd definitely go for seconds".
So far, in HC-110 dil.B, it's incredibly contrasty. Overexposed and processed in HC-110 dil.E is really nice. It also likes caffenol a lot.
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,637
    • photog & music
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2020, 01:23:33 AM »
Fomapan is one of those weird things. When you first look at it, you go "yuck!". Then you play around with development and you go "hey, this is not that bad!". Then you look at the cost and you go "I'd definitely go for seconds".
So far, in HC-110 dil.B, it's incredibly contrasty. Overexposed and processed in HC-110 dil.E is really nice. It also likes caffenol a lot.

This mirrors my experience. +1.5 EV in HC110 E is tolerable. But then I look at Tri-X and it's so much nicer and easier and I kinda have no choice :P Plus I can push Tri-X...

02Pilot

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,866
  • Malcontent
    • Filmosaur
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2020, 01:38:12 AM »
In light of the latest price bumps, I really need to revisit the Kentmere films. I only used them years ago when I was just beginning with developing my own film, so I'm sure I didn't get everything I could out of them. It's hard to move away from TriX and HP5, though....
Any man who can see what he wants to get on film will usually find some way to get it;
and a man who thinks his equipment is going to see for him is not going to get much of anything.


-Hunter S. Thompson
-
http://filmosaur.wordpress.com/

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,758
Re: Film and “sticker shock”
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2020, 03:22:26 PM »
I must admit that HP5 and Tri-x are hard to beat.
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.