Jump to content


Photo

price/cost of film over the past decades?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 chris descor

chris descor
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 January 2010 - 03:43 AM

hi
I wasnt alive to know what the cost of motion picture film s8/16mm/35mm etc was
over the last 3 or 4 decades.
I'm interested to know how much s8/16mm/35mm film used to cost from approx the 1960s to now. In terms of per format; and per foot, as well as 100', 400', 1000' etc.
I know some of you have been around longer than me, and might have price lists/sheets for film over different years or decades. it would be cool if you could share your experience.

I've tried looking online, but havent found anything.

for instance, a roll of super8 is around about $15-$18 I would say currently, some might correct me here. how much did a roll of super8 cost in 1975? in 1980? in 1985? in 1990? in 1995? in 1999? etc

another expample
as of now; approx
fuji 16mm, 100' daylight spool $0.34/ft
fuji 16mm, 400' $0.30/ft

kodak 35mm, 400' $0.50/ft
VISION3 500T Color Negative Film 5219, Factory 400' $0.64/ft
VISION2 250D Color Negative Film 5205, Factory 400' $0.59/ft

etc

again I might need correcting.
of course then you've got different prices from different countries or areas, or for students, or from the film companies themselves vs shops, or short-ends etc
but maybe in general


I know it might be hard to say, but an estimation is cool, but cooler is first-hand info & experience/knowledge.


I would like to see the inflation of the price of film over the last half-century.
a coke used to cost $1.2 or less when I was a kid 10 years ago. now its around $3.
i'm sure a coke in the 60s would have cost a few cents.

what was it like with film? how much has it risen in price/cost ?

in short; I just want to know how much different film formats; s8, 16mm and 35mm, used to cost since the 60s until now. so the price in 1965, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 2000, 2005 etc
  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 10 January 2010 - 08:33 AM

While I don't have the costs myself off hand, I have to mention the need to adjust for inflation; $.05 in the 1920s is lot different than $.05 now.
  • 0

#3 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 11 January 2010 - 02:59 AM

Without going into inflation, cost indeces, the market for film, etc, the cost of COLOR is far cheaper now, in real terms than it was forty years ago. I'd say, within the past years, real prices have gone back up, but color negative stock costs maybe a QUARTER of what it did before, when B&W was the norm.

Technicolor was even more expensive.


Color stock didn't become a non-premium product until the mid-to-late '70s.


Now, since the late '90s with HD cameras, we've seen film companies die, and stock selection shrink somewhat. Prices were going up and up with Kodak stock. I'm not sure whether or not they are still cutting them since a lot of TV shows have started to move to HD.


Film is a commodity, like oil, or corn. It doesn't follow a straight line of increase or decrease in price, it fluctuates based upon the needs of the market and alternatives.



Of course, I am only talking about real costs, not cost before inflation is factored in. I honestly get sick of people saying "everything was cheaper in my day." I am pretty good with numbers; things cost about a tenth as much during the WWII era as they do now, a seventh to an eighth as much in the '50s, a sixth as much in the late '60s, and were roughly half as much twenty years ago, after double-digit inflation came down, at least in terms of the trends in the United States. But people made comparably less too, so I multiply everything in my head. A lot of times the cost people pine for X number of years ago is actually more after you factor in the inflation factor. . .
  • 0

#4 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 11 January 2010 - 04:59 PM

In the late 70s the price of Kodak raw stock doubled in a few months because the Hunt brothes of Texas were trying to corner the silver market.
  • 0

#5 Jim Carlile

Jim Carlile
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 February 2010 - 04:56 AM

Super 8, for Kodachrome: 1975 = $2.50, 1980= $4.50, 1985= $ 8.50; 1990 about $10, add $2 to $3 for sound, $6 more by 1990; 1995 = $13.00, leveling off to about $15 at the end.

Tri-X and Plus- X; 1975, virtually unavailable unless you bought 100 rolls, about $6 by 1980 if you could find it, $8 bucks until about 1995, now $11, because Kodak practically subsidizes it.

It's a bargain, really-- probably more than ever.

1975-- 16mm all over the place, recans, about 4 cents a foot for both color and B/W, fresh factory stock about $6 for 100 feet-- by 1990 16mm 100 feet was about $18 for B/W, $25 for color, not much less than now.

Ilford and Dupont was considerably cheaper in the 70s than Kodak.
  • 0


The Slider

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Opal

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

CineTape

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam