8mm Forum: Why shooting 8mm now becomes more expensive?

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Why shooting 8mm now becomes more expensive?

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Why shooting 8mm now becomes more expensive?

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted February 11, 2007 10:37 PM

Along with the end of K-40's era we have now to rely on 64T only.

However, though both are produced by Kodak, but why now we have to pay more to get one 50" processed.

During the K-40, I could get a silent cartridge for AU$ 18 (eqv. US$ 13.5, process included.

Now, the cheapest a 64T silent cartrdige is AU$ 22 (eqv. US$ 16.5) + lab cost AU$ 20 = totat AU$ 42 (US$ 31.5).

Solely to compare the price of K-40 vs 64T has resulted a different gap. OK, we are talking the Kodachrome vs Ektachrome. But the Ektachome's price was also less than the today's price of 64T.

I once calculated the cost of return shipping, it could take AU$3 to arrive at my door (Fiji). Plus the cost of processing and seller's margin, there was only AU$ 8 (US$ 6) left for the cost of one 50" cartridge. Do you think that was the pure cost or there is a subsidy?

So, what happened now? Why it is now more expensive to shoot with 8mm films?

thanks

[ February 12, 2007, 03:56 AM: Message edited by: Winbert Hutahaean ]

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Knut Nordahl
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 173
From: Norway
Registered: Dec 2005

posted February 12, 2007 01:56 AM

Hi Winbert.

K40 was for the amateur. K40 was a product associated with the home marked and that marked is not there any more. It was a very convenient film to use but not especially environmentally nice and had to go.

As they (Kodak) no longer want to have any processing facility it's no wonder why the replacement film gets more costly.
But all in all when K40 died we got E64t, 100D (wittner) and that film from GK and Fuji decided to go on supporting Single 8 for some time so I think it's even better now!

| IP: Logged

Steve Klare
Film Guy

Posts: 7016
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted February 12, 2007 04:11 AM

For a while just a few years ago, Kodak offered K-40 with processing for USD $13.50. When the last 6 rolls I have are finished, I think my next color reversal is going to be Sprectra Velvia 50 for USD $35.00 processing included.

OUCH!!!

--------------------
All I ask is a wide screen and a projector to light her by...

| IP: Logged

Joerg Polzfusz
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 815
From: Berlin, Germany, Europe, Earth, Solar System
Registered: Apr 2006

posted February 12, 2007 07:28 AM

Hi,

the low prices were mainly due to mass-production, mass-selling and mass-processing. With the declining number of users of smallformat-cameras, the "mass" factor is gone: E.g. the "more than a million Super8-carts sold only in Western Germany and Berlin (West) per year" (in the late seventies) dropped to a few hundred-thousands carts of K40 sold and processed in all over Europe (the last years before Kodak closed down its lab in Switzerland).

The number of photos/slides taken per year decreases, too, removing the "mass"-factor from the raw-filmstock-production.

Last, but not least: The prices for Silver and other materials needed for filmstock-production increased, the expenses for protecting the environment increased, wages increased, taxes increased, ... .

Did I forget anything?
Jörg

| IP: Logged

Steve Klare
Film Guy

Posts: 7016
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted February 12, 2007 09:05 AM

All true!

-still stings!

--------------------
All I ask is a wide screen and a projector to light her by...

| IP: Logged

Alessandro Machi
Junior
Posts: 16
From: Southern California
Registered: Sep 2005

posted February 15, 2007 06:40 AM

If Kodak has simply explained the economics to its customers, and created the same pricing structure for Kodachrome that is now in effect for Ektachrome, would they have retained more Kodachrome customers overall than Ektachrome customers?

However, Kodak still would have needed to keep their lab open. One part of the equation was the value of the property, apparently it made more business "sense" to sell the building that housed the Kodachrome processing.

The great thing about Kodak's move is that all of their remaining films can be processed same day. It is theoretically possible that small super-8 labs could still pop up here and there because of this.

If one includes Velvia into the overall Super-8 mix along with the fact that all of these stocks are same day, this actually is a great time for Super-8.

--------------------
My Super-8 Still Images
Super-8mm.net
Super-8mm.com

I purchase Kodak Film & Inkjet Paper but can't find Kodak Inkjet Printable DVDs.

Small Format Magazine
Super-8 Today Magazine

| IP: Logged

Simon McConway
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1085
From: Doncaster, UK
Registered: Jun 2004

posted February 19, 2007 04:49 AM

My experience with the new film has been very good. Firstly, it's performance; fantastic blue skies and far better performance in low light than K40. Secondly, cost. Films are £7.99 from 7dayshop.com. Processing is about £6 per cartridge when send to Dawynes in USA and this prices includes all shipping. Maybe slightly more costly but we have always known Super 8 film making to be costly. We're not in it to save money are we? We are in it for the love of film. If you want to save money, best go for tape? Not me, Sir!

| IP: Logged

Joerg Polzfusz
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 815
From: Berlin, Germany, Europe, Earth, Solar System
Registered: Apr 2006

posted February 19, 2007 08:45 AM

Hi,

IMHO Kodak stopped its Kodachrome because it was using an outdated process that required too many chemicals, too many steps and a too precise measurement/timing and because Kodachrome was too expensive to produce compared to Ektachrome.

Jörg

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2