I'm going to launch into a somewhat philosophical discourse, so, fair warning: I find the 'hit rate' to be much higher for shooting ULF and printing in platinum. I think it is partly due to 'image discipline'. When I've got the big camera out, and know I only have 10 exposures that will have to last all day, I am much more careful about picking a subject, composing it on the ground glass and getting the right exposure. The picture I posted above represents a short photo excursion when I was 'in the groove' with my 7x17. That morning over about a two hour period, I made six exposures. I developed the negatives that afternoon, and printed the four possible 'lookers' last night. I think two of them will interest me enough to go back and get the 'perfect' print. Two others are 'okay', but probably will get relegated to the almost-there pile. The last two were decent photos, but had technical flaws. One was blurred because of tripod shake in some wind. The other had a hot streak I got from using Rollo pyro in Jobo drums, and apparently not rocking it back and forth frequently enough during processing. I plan on going back and getting both of those photos again.
This day was about typical. So my hit rate is about one-in-three. I don't know when the last time I got 12 good photos off of a 36 exposure roll of 35mm. That said, there are certainly instances where the big camera is out of the question and the small cameras are all that are practical. The good news is that the 'image discipline' transfers to the use of a small camera as well. Recently, I find that I will be taking a 35mm photo, and I consciously think about whether my shadows will have detail, and if the edges and corners look right in the rangefinder.
I guess what I'm saying is that, yes, it is expensive if you shoot and print like you do with small cameras. But you won't be shooting that way. You'd be worn out if you tried.
Happy snappies to all,