If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
I have been keeping track of the costs of my photographic hobby now
for a few months and have put them on my webserver. They can be seen at the following long url: http://www.troublepeach.com/cms/modu...rder=0&thold=0 Or, if you have difficulty opening it, go to http://www.troublepeach.com/cms/index.php and click on the link in the right hand columns that says "Summary of Costs of Photographic Hobby." ---------------- This page is a chart comparing my digital, 35mm, and MF experiences of cost. Once you are viewing the chart you can click the header where it says "MF," "35mm," "digital," or "all" for a more detailed chart. This started as medium format only, but I since began tracking all my costs. If you want to know why, my original motivation article can be found on my webserver by clicking on "more about photography" and then clicking on "Motivation of cost tracking for photographic hobby." Or you can use this long url: http://www.troublepeach.com/cms/modu...rticle&sid= 7 Hope you all like it, --- Scotty Fitzgerald |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
I'm still a bit confused (no surprise to many readers ;-) You note under digital that equipment costs are moot as it is not an expandable camera? I have had to add a tripod, backup materials (DVD, CDR), purchased a video editing software manual, and bought media in the last month. Doesn't seem moot to me ;-) Nor is it clear what these expenditures are buying on digital ($24.88 for what? prints? ) Under MF you list equipment costs of $557.20 for a seagull TLR, then it jumps to $681.15? In Dec. 03 you show total costs of $890.66 for 100 total exposures, removing the equipment costs of $557.20 suggests circa $330-ish for 100 exposures? Again, it is hard to judge w/o knowing more specifics. To most of us, the fixed lens TLR would seem as moot on equipment as the 2 MP digital? Under 35mm, your equipment costs seem to double exactly between jan and feb.? Are you sure there isn't some glitch in the spreadsheet? I'd break down this two ways; first, general photo gear (tripod, bag, ....). Then specific gear costs for each system. Then consumables for printing, developing, and so on for each. Clearly you are spending much more on MF gear (I think), and have little depreciation expenses on 35mm "hand-me-down" and 2 MP digital. That's a smart way to go, IMHO; esp. if you mainly want email or web images digitally, and the interchangeable lens 35mm M42 is a great buy, and lets you get around the fixed lens issue with the TLR. See my "80% solution" using one normal lens (http://medfmt.8k.com/bronlensenvy.html) and then mix and match (see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/value.html) to get the best out of each system. hth bobm -- ************************************************** ********************* * Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 * ********************Standard Disclaimers Apply************************* |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
I found this persons post quite reasonable and they posted to the relevant
NGs. Why not not take your bloated ego somewhere else and self-deflate. HTH - peteZ "Silvio Manuel" wrote in message ... In article , (Scotty Fitzgerald) wrote: I have been keeping track of the costs of my photographic hobby now for a few months and have put them on my webserver. They can be seen at the following long url: Too bad you can not seem to fathom usenet protocol and find the need to crosspost this tid bit. Basically it leaves no desire to visit the site. What's more after 22 years of doing this I have a pretty fair idea of the costs. Bet I spend more in chemistry and paper in a year than you will in your whole "career" :-D |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
Silvio Manuel wrote: In article , (Scotty Fitzgerald) wrote: I have been keeping track of the costs of my photographic hobby now for a few months and have put them on my webserver. They can be seen at the following long url: Too bad you can not seem to fathom usenet protocol and find the need to crosspost this tid bit. Basically it leaves no desire to visit the site. What's more after 22 years of doing this I have a pretty fair idea of the costs. Bet I spend more in chemistry and paper in a year than you will in your whole "career" :-D He said it was a "hobby" not a "career". I'm also not so sure that spending a fortune on paper and chemistry makes any of us better than anyone else. And the crosspost was, at least, relevant for his discussion. Stan Visual Arts Photography |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
Hi, Bob, I was greatly looking forward to your comments!
Actually, yes, the $24.88 is for printing. I lost the cost of the camera as it was before I began hunting around this group looking for somebody to clue me into what MF would cost. My tripod is a hand me down also. My digital media, I use the original smartmedia card and I load to computer and send back to the card what I needed to print, and took the card to the camera shop. Look! no more CD's (at least not until the annual burn-the-jpgs-and-tifs routine next year. I guess you can say I went overboard when I took the advice in your webpages on budget mindedness to heart. Heck, I am even pushing around a librarian to buy medium format books for the library system! %D I do admit to not being the best accountant in the world, and I do need to keep this a little informal or I won't be able to keep it up, as they say. I will try to field some other points. The jump you note in MF equipement is accounted for by a few items. Theft and unusual breakage insurance. They won't insure my older 35mm hand me down or my digital as I cannot produce a reciept. My 35mm costs, I bought lense and telephoto zoom extender. Please note I bought all my wide-roll film in December. I also put a compression program under that early on. Prob'y would have been better to account for it seperately as I do get use on the other formats I don't use too much (just like I get insurance for my newly purchased used lense. I am not mathmatically adventurous enough to try to pro rate my insurance expense. Another item 35mm HMD (hand me down.) My camera store gives me film instead of second set of prints. Bob, I can't remember all the details on what depreciation is, so I can't account for it. In conclusion: it is not the best accounting, but I did enter all my expenditures into the HTML. I am buying used lense for 35mm hand me down, they seem to run about $40 a piece. I figure I am giving the different zoom factors a test drive on the cheap before I committ to another camera. Also, I am considering the purchase of a second used mamiya 35mm body as a backup in case my hand me down breaks. How I will account for this I don't know yet. But, anyhow, the important thing is that a)my not quite professional accounting is better than no accounting b)the next newbie that comes along saying "how much" can get some kind of answer and c)hopefully somebody comes along and shows us his numbers in a better way. Thanks, bob, the 80% lense envey solution is working great for me. Can I get a link from your site to mine? l8r, --- Scotty On 5 Mar 2004 19:50:27 -0600, (Bob Monaghan) wrote: I'm still a bit confused (no surprise to many readers ;-) You note under digital that equipment costs are moot as it is not an expandable camera? I have had to add a tripod, backup materials (DVD, CDR), purchased a video editing software manual, and bought media in the last month. Doesn't seem moot to me ;-) Nor is it clear what these expenditures are buying on digital ($24.88 for what? prints? ) Under MF you list equipment costs of $557.20 for a seagull TLR, then it jumps to $681.15? In Dec. 03 you show total costs of $890.66 for 100 total exposures, removing the equipment costs of $557.20 suggests circa $330-ish for 100 exposures? Again, it is hard to judge w/o knowing more specifics. To most of us, the fixed lens TLR would seem as moot on equipment as the 2 MP digital? Under 35mm, your equipment costs seem to double exactly between jan and feb.? Are you sure there isn't some glitch in the spreadsheet? I'd break down this two ways; first, general photo gear (tripod, bag, ...). Then specific gear costs for each system. Then consumables for printing, developing, and so on for each. Clearly you are spending much more on MF gear (I think), and have little depreciation expenses on 35mm "hand-me-down" and 2 MP digital. That's a smart way to go, IMHO; esp. if you mainly want email or web images digitally, and the interchangeable lens 35mm M42 is a great buy, and lets you get around the fixed lens issue with the TLR. See my "80% solution" using one normal lens (http://medfmt.8k.com/bronlensenvy.html) and then mix and match (see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/value.html) to get the best out of each system. hth bobm -- ************************************************* ********************** * Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 * ********************Standard Disclaimers Apply************************* |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
Your cost analysis is a good starting point but a bit incomplete. Seems
you are only comparing your variable costs and ignoring your fixed and opportunity costs. For example you think that some equipment has no cost. But even if it were free to you, by not selling it you loose the value of the money you could have salvaged from it. But the most blatant omission is that you are ignoring the digital processing and storage costs while including them for the film. You must have some investment in computer equipment and the electricity to power it. My point is that while your variable costs for digital can be much lower, the fixed costs are much higher than you care to include in your analysis. Nice idea; "D" for econ 101 though. Scotty Fitzgerald wrote: ---------------- This page is a chart comparing my digital, 35mm, and MF experiences of cost. Once you are viewing the chart you can click the header where it says "MF," "35mm," "digital," or "all" for a more detailed chart. -- "The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." --Thomas Jefferson |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
Silvio Manuel wrote:
In article , (Scotty Fitzgerald) wrote: I have been keeping track of the costs of my photographic hobby now for a few months and have put them on my webserver. They can be seen at the following long url: Too bad you can not seem to fathom usenet protocol and find the need to crosspost this tid bit. Crossposting is a VERY correct "protocol" to use if the topic is relevant to the groups it's posted to, which this was. What's the wrong protocol is to copy multiple posts of the same article to several groups. We're all glad you use a bunch of paper and chemistry, what exactly does that have to do with anything? -- Stacey |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Costs for photography
Scotty Fitzgerald wrote:
Hi, Bob, I was greatly looking forward to your comments! Actually, yes, the $24.88 is for printing. I lost the cost of the camera as it was before I began hunting around this group looking for somebody to clue me into what MF would cost. My tripod is a hand me down also. My digital media, I use the original smartmedia card and I load to computer and send back to the card what I needed to print, and took the card to the camera shop. Look! no more CD's So you're trusting the harddrive with your images? That's the least reliable component in a computer! -- Stacey |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Photoprinter running costs? | Jobelisk | Digital Photography | 19 | July 5th 04 05:26 AM |
Compact Flash Memory Card costs | Engineer | Digital Photography | 7 | June 25th 04 11:32 PM |