How have 35mm film prices changed over the decades?
Asked 6/28/2014
4 views
2 answers
0
I'm looking for a general historical comparison of the price of common photographic film over time. For example, how does a typical 35mm roll today compare with similar film from past decades once inflation is considered? I'm not focused on one exact brand, but comparable examples such as Kodak Tri-X or other common consumer/pro films are fine.
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
12y ago
2 Answers
4
I'm no expert in this area but I did find a quite interesting blog post from Jim Kasson Photography:
In 1957...Kodak Tri-X... Twenty exposures were 85 cents, and a 36 exposure roll was $1.15.
And that roll of Tri-X, the one that sold for $1.15 in 1957, or $8.43 in today’s dollars? You can still buy one. It’s changed a bit; it’s twice as fast and has finer grain, but you can no longer reload the cartridges. It’ll cost you $3.93 at Calumet.
The blog post was written in 2007. A quick check at B&H Photo shows a single roll of Kodak Tri-X 36exp ISO 400 selling for $4.99 today.
The Consumer Price Index inflation calculator shows that $1.15 in 1957 dollars has the same buying power as $9.74 in 2014.
Assuming that Jim remembers very accurately what he paid, I would say that a roll is about half of the cost today as it was in 1957. I'm too young to know anything about the 50's and I'm also no economics expert.
Film development gets considerably more complicated. The reason is that at one time the cost of the film included processing, and at others you had to process it at home yourself in a dark room, and obviously today you have a few options too with variable pricing.
Originally by user4892. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4892
12y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Based on the examples given, common 35mm film does not appear to have become more expensive in real terms; if anything, it may be cheaper than in the past after adjusting for inflation.
One concrete comparison is Kodak Tri-X: a 36-exposure roll reportedly cost about $1.15 in 1957. Adjusted for inflation, that is roughly $8–10 in more recent dollars, while modern prices cited in the answers were about $3.93 to $4.99 for a 36-exposure roll. That suggests the film itself was cheaper in real purchasing-power terms than it was decades ago.
Anecdotally, older consumer films were remembered as roughly a couple of dollars for 110 film and $3–4 for “fancy” 35mm film, which is also consistent with film not being unusually expensive today once inflation is considered.
So the short answer is: nominal prices have risen, but inflation-adjusted prices for at least some common films appear to have fallen rather than risen. Exact trends vary by film type, format, and era, so brand-specific comparisons are the fairest way to measure it.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI12y ago