I know, this has probably been done a bunch of times before by more technical and financially astute people than I. But what the heck, just because someone has done something better than I can has never stopped me having a go before.
Let’s just have a quick look at the basic costs of a 35mm film based system vs the equivalent digital system.
Taking Nikon Pro level cameras as a basis (F3 for film, D3x for digital)
Film Camera system costs.
Camera x2 = £2600 (these bodies retailed for around £1300 when new)
Lenses (various ) = £10,000 (Using variety of Nikon Prime “pro” lenses)
Flash guns and various accessories = £2000 (2 x speedlights and bits and pieces)
Total for film system = £14,600
Digital Camera system costs
Camera x2 = £10,000
Lenses (various) = £10,000
Flash guns and various accessories = £2,000
Note that the lenses and accessories would be very much the same for both systems
Total for Digital system = £22,000
Now what about the recording media costs? i.e. the film and processing etc.
Let’s base it on a snapper actually shooting 150 days a year and shooting approx 250 frames for each day. Certainly not a high amount in any ones language.
Film
250 frames =7 x 36 exposure films x 150 = 1050 films.
Kodak Chrome = 1050 x £8.00 = £8400
Kodak Porta = 1050 x £4.50 = £4725
Processing E6 = £7350
Processing C41 = £10,500 (dev and contact sheets)
Total £15,750 for chromes
£15,225 for film neg and dev/contacts
Digital
Memory cards 2 x8gb + 2 x 16gb = £250
Computer - Apple iMac 27 inch 2.7GHz Intel Core i5 4GB Ram + 1TB Hard Drive = £1500
Imaging and cataloguing software = £2,000
Total = £3,750
So, so far we have totals of £30,350 for film system and basic processing costs
and £25,750 for a digital system.
So, that is a no-brainer then. Digital is more expensive for the equipment but that is made up for with cheaper overall processing costs?
Really?
How long does it take to take or send the film to the lab? - 10 minutes ?
How long does it take to sort and send the contacts or chromes to the client? – half a day max ?
So if your time is worth £1000 per day then that is £500
Now for the digital files, how long does it take to download, sort, convert from raw, sharpen, colour correct, keyword, catalogue the files, backup and store? = 2 days? (OK, so you can do that in a day because unlike me you have your workflow expertly sorted)
So that is £1-2000 worth of your time.
Now what other costs are involved in the two.
Well with film there really is not much else. You shoot, you process and you pass to client.
Equipment is pretty robust and you would only be replacing camera and/or lenses when they broke or maybe after 5 years when they are depreciated.
So let’s say you budget for a complete turnaround of equipment every five years. That works out at around £3000 per year.
With Digital though, you are probably going to have to replace/update the camera every couple of years. Digital is moving quickly and the cameras are getting better all the time. You need to compete so you need the best.
Computers need to be able to cope with the bigger and more complex files so that will be upgraded/replaced every couple of years.
Software moves on and up. So that will also be upgraded/replaced every couple of years.
So let’s say that you need to budget for a total turnaround of your equipment every 3 years.
That works out at around £8500 per year.
So now you have an ongoing annual cost for film of £18,750 (that is your film and processing plus equipment)and the cost for digital of only £8500
So ok you say, digital is still cheaper in the long run.
BUT WAIT...........
We forgot the TIME. (not forgetting the old adage that “time is money”)
Film is only a half a day so for 150 days a year shooting you have another 75 days processing etc.
With digital that is at best 150 extra days for processing etc.
So if your time is worth 1000 per day that is 75000 against 150000.
WOW – suddenly the cost of digital has shot ahead. It is not “cheap” after all.
Now, are you letting your customers know this when they say “but all you have to do is shoot and stick it all on the computer”???
Please note, all figures are only rough figures, they can go up or down at will depending on what you shoot and what equipment is required. Studio equipment and actual printing costs are basically the same for both although for digital there is again a lot more TIME involved so overall Digital will still come out more costly in the long run.
I also have no doubt that plenty of people will not agree with any or all of the above. Guess what?? That is fine by me.
I am only giving an opinion based on my own experience.
I find that I am spending more time on all the aspects of a shoot when shooting digital than I ever did with film and consequently that means that the overall costs are higher.
If you are a hobbyist shooting purely for fun and your own satisfaction then the only thing in the above which is relevant is that after the first year (when you initially buy the equipment), your overall day to day costs will reduce.
If you are a pro then the physical costs will reduce but everything else will increase.
Have fun.
A
No comments:
Post a Comment