Money And Investing  -

Film

12 10 05 20 24

-------- Still Takes Good Pictures

I still use 35mm film.  Not entirely by choice, but due to a restrained use of resources that helps me avoid debt.

Nonetheless, the desire to switch to digital, and the inconveniences offered by film, as well as its incremental cost is always on the back of my mind: specially after a couple of weekends ago, where I spent $45 on 10 rolls developing, plus around $20 on the cost of the film (not counting my time scanning).

We have experience with both, digital and Film.  I have a N80 with a 28-80mm, 70-300mm, 60mm micro, and 20mm ultra-wide lenses.  My wife has a 3.2 MP Olympus D-550 camera that still takes very sharp pictures with a nice color saturation.  Her camera can handle most photo situations impressively.  The Film SLR camera provides more flexibility that I would like to replicate with a similar Digital SLR camera.  And each having his/her own cameras allows for each of us taking the same subject looked from different points of view and compossition without having to ask the other for the camera.

The economical advantage of digital is that once you do the initial investment (a good camera, lenses, accessories, and multiple media cards), the incremental cost is low, and the quality and flexibility you obtain from the pictures is great.  The disadvantage is the initial cost.  The non-tangible advantage is that you can check on the LCD monitor in the back of your camera if you got the exact photo you expected, saving you frustrations, and increasing the number of good pictures taken for the same effort.

I have started saving towards a Nikon D50 with a good lens and a couple of gigabytes of memory.  It will set me back by around $1200.  And probably it will take me around a year to save: which gives me the added benefit of thinking about it for a year and finding out if I really like photography so much as to drop more than a grand on it, and for its price to come down a bit or a better model to appear on the market.  Those $1,200 USD is money I do not have available right now (once money goes into long term savings it doesn't come back into a spending account, and emergency and vacation money isn't to be touched except for its purpose). 

The Film camera I have takes very good pictures a provides great flexibility, probably better than most point-and-shoots that are on the market.  I will not degrade my pictures quality just to use modern technology.  Besides, I gave a 3MP digital camera to my wife four years ago that served us very well in our trip to Japan in 2001, and will probably serve us equally well in our trip to Argentina and Chile on November 2005.

In the meantime I can't justify getting into debt, and I am stuck with some inconveniences that film provides:
- Scanning
- Asking for film to be checked individually at airports (x ray machines damages undeveloped film, no matter what the TSA says).
- Having to fill up a roll before developing.  Only one speed for the whole roll.
- Bulk of carrying rolls.
- The cost of the film and development.
- And not being able to check the exposure was the right one, right away.

The film cost is fairly low: from $1 to $5, depending on speed, quality, and quantity of film.  So far the lowest price I have found for roll development only is $4.50 to $5 fixed.

Consumer market film is usually sold in 4 roll packs of 24 exposures each for around $2 a roll or less.  Professional or Superior quality film is sold at around $4 to $5 a roll of 36.  Although it is extremely convenient to shoot small rolls (easier to finish and allowing flexibility of changing film speed sooner), it is not too cost effective even if the roll costs double.

The following table illustrates my point:
$1 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 24 frames = 0.25
$2 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 24 frames = 0.29
$3 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 24 frames = 0.33

$3 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 36 frames = 0.22
$4 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 36 frames = 0.25
$5 roll + $5 developing = $6    / 36 frames = 0.28

I think I will start getting 36 exposure film even if it costs a couple of bucks more -- it will render better colors anyway.  A small step in reducing my photography cost. 

Something I have noticed about digital media is that although reusable, it also has an initial per picture cost.  It, however, is a lot lower.  Many people who buy a digital camera before going to a multi-week trip at a remote destination need to buy extra memory cards to preserve all of those pictures until they can reach an Internet Cafe where to burn them into CDs.  A 1GB $60 memory card probably allows for $250 pictures.  The initial per frame cost is around 0.24, not including prints.  However, once paid, the next multi-week trip to a remote location will provide cheaper snapshots.  (I need to buy more SmartMedia cards for my wife before this upcoming Argentina trip, as some of the ones we used in Japan have been damaged over the years).

Do you have any other tips on how to save money with film?  (Besides saving enough to buy a digital camera set and ignore film altogether).

For the time being:  saving at least $50 a month towards the end goal of setting myself free from film, on a separate "toys" account.

Moral Of the Story:

• Latest technology is good and fun.  However, it is not always the "right" moment to acquire it.
• Saving for a big "toy" purchase allows time to think if you really want it, and potentially for prices to drop.
• If you think it over, you may be able to find ways of enjoying what you have a bit more, or reducing its operation costs a bit more.  Just give more thought to what you have, and you may be able to extend its usefull life a bit more.