TriXshooter Done with Tri-X

I have given it much thought.

 

When my current batch of Tri-X is exhaused I an finished with Kodak.

Ilford has made it perfectly clear that they intend to support the

film segement of the market, introduce new products, and reintroduce

formerly discontinued products.

 

I can not support a company who does not support my needs and who

will, I have no doubt, drop all film products in short time.

 

Sour grapes? No, not really. Disappointed, yes. I just choose to

spend my money where I feel it is appreciated.

After all that thinking was finished you couldn't just move on with your new strategy, you had to announce it to the world. Why?

I have never been a TriX shooter but TriX has to be the most beloved film of

all time. Even now I know several people who use nothing else. I would think

that it would be available for quite awhile. I am still waiting for Ilford to

reintroduce FP4 in 220.. like Kodak did with the 220 plus X. When Kodak

stopped production of PXP 220 for awhile they did continue on with 220 TXP.

I tested it out at the time and was pleasantly surprised at the quality of it.. I

always thought it was crap.

 

I wouldn't get too angry at Kodak as they really drug their heals commiting to

digital. Use your favorite film as long as you can and stock up a freezer. Film

isn't getting any cheaper.

Just for fun, check out a similar discussion at apug.org, "Leaving Tri-X".

Best wishes to you, Jay. I'll toss another bulk roll of Tri-X in my freezer in your honor!

:-)

I invite you to give HP5+ a whirl in HC-110 (H). Works great at EI 320 and EI 800. A quick search of the archives will give pretty ample info on times and temps.

 

I shot Tri-X when it was available imported from B&H. When that dried up, I shot some Neopan 400 (nice film) and then bulked up on HP5+ in the freezer (also a nice film). I like the convenience of HC-110 (Kodak, I know), and HP5+ seems to respond nicely to this developer.

 

As for Tri-X, Kodak is stupid. They should virtually guarantee a relatively inexpensive supply of this film to the market, in distribution, pricing and marketing, to keep some large portion of the Kodak faithful happy and continuing to promote their products.

 

Kodak is stupid.

 

Scott

HP5+ is good, no doubt about it. Tri-X it ain't. Sorry guys, but that's the way it is. I will use it until I can't get it any more. Why worry about what might happen?

I understand your frustration. However it's probably best to slowly phase in Ilford HP-5 as

you phase out Tri-X. I do believe that Tri-X will be the last man standing in Kodak's film

line. It's a good film, but there are plenty of similar products out there.

 

I'm teaching two Photo I classes this Fall. There are 16 students in each class. I tell them to

buy Kodak Tri-X or Ilford HP-5+. This semester I had to warn them that Kodak is shutting

down paper production, and film production could end soon as well. I told them it would

probably be available for the next couple of years, no matter what. Nearly all of them

bought HP-5. They're not going to buy from a company that will not support its products.

They probably won't buy kodak cell phones either. It's really too bad.

Kodak needs to stabilize its base before investing in digital. They're not doing that, and

seem to be running scared at the moment.

"Just for fun, check out a similar discussion at apug.org, "Leaving Tri-X"."

 

Well I love tri-x, I am certainly not finnished with tri-x, but I am finnished with APUG!

 

HP5 is wonderful, I use it as well as tri-x now, but the two are quite different.

Goodness, what whingeing! It's as if Kodak's CEO decided to divest the company of its analog business as a personal affront! A rather self-important attitude, if you ask me.

 

Not sure how Kodak is "not support[ing][our]needs"; they make film and chemicals we have all used, and which have served us well. Why not use them as long as they are available?

 

Kodak is a colossal industrial firm trying to navigate a rapidly changing market for imaging products, crossing terra incognita and trying to predict the future with uncertain information and in some cases, no models of what may come. Other huge firms have similiarly stumbled in like circumstances, in this and in other industries. Kodak's first job is to maximize its shareholders' return on capital. They do this by serving their customers' needs as best as they can divine what those are now, and what they will be in an uncertain future. While you and I have the luxury of living in the present, Kodak has to look years ahead to chart its course. The market will decide in the end.

 

Furthermore, I don't understand why anyone has to "transition" from one film to another. We aren't enriching uranium here, people; at most it should take a few rolls of film to figure out what combination of film speed and development time it takes to get the desired results. If you like Tri-X, use it until it's gone, and then find something else.

 

Good heavens! What a waste of someone's hard drive space!

Kodak will do what they have/want to. HP5+ is definitley a good film in HC-110........will Kodak still make developer I wonder?....but that's ok too, HP5+ looks great in PMK Pyro....although, so does Tri-X.

 

The real loss when Tri-X goes, is a film that still looks great when pushed. Tri-X is awesome at 1000 in Acufine. HP5+ aint bad, but it doesnt have the look of TX pushed. Nothing looks like TX pushed.

 

Having said that though, Delta 3200 at 1250 in PMK Pyro has a real nice look to it.........not the same as TX pushed in Acufine, mind you.......but a real nice look of it's own. I'd really like to have both options if possible.

 

What I am trying to find is one of those 3rd party films that pushes well. Foma 400 sucks pushed........anything else from those type films push well..........anybody know first hand?

I will continue to use my favorite films for as long as they are available. I do not care who is making them. I will worry about changing when the time comes. At the moment I see no panic.

>>I just choose to spend my money where I feel it is appreciated.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of Kodak employees (many in the U.S.) who would appreciate it if you continued to purchase Tri-X. If choice of film is going to be an emotional response rather than based on the product's quality, then that ought to enter into the equation imho.

I agree with Michael Sebastian. You can't take Kodak's digital moves personally. Kodak is a huge business, and they really have had little choice. I'm not saying they should discontinue anything, but c'mon, lighten up. If Tri-X does vanish in the near future, I will be unhappy, because I love it so, but dem's da breaks.

It's nice that some contributor's have all the economic and personal answers to our

"whingeing". However, the fact that many photographers feel betrayed by Kodak's kamikaze

approach to sensitized products won't be ameliorated by Dr. Phil's platitudes.

 

I hope Kodak sticks in the film business. I will continue to buy the Kodak products I always

have (HIE, Plus-X, Super 8 stocks).

But we're all a little nervous that Big Yellow is tossing out the baby with the bathwater.

It doesn't seem five minutes since it looked like Ilford was on the way out- so any declarations they make will be worthless if,as is possible, they hit trouble again. They can be the nicest, most honourable, best intentioned folks in the whole world but in reality they can't guarantee that HP5 (or anything else) is going to be around forever. My own strategy will be to use the best film I can get at any point and not bother myself about what attitudes or rumours surround future supply. For the moment, the best for my purposes is Tri-X.

Amen, David.

 

Honestly? I can't rationalize ANY manufacturer of B&W film staying in the game regardless of their strategy or intent - not even as a niche market supplier. Speculating on which will be around longer is sort of like holding a lottery on nursing home patients regarding which one will die last.

 

My working assumption is that all silver-based photography will pass into the annals of history in a few years time and I am not going to waste precious time with the distracting game of "who will be left".

 

My choices right now are APX 100 and Kodak Tri-X and that's driven solely by suitability for my work. When (and probably not if) those products are no longer available I will make adjustments. And so on until no more adjustments can be made.

"After all that thinking was finished you couldn't just move on with your new strategy, you had to announce it to the world. Why?"

 

Amen.

 

Misery loves company, I suppose.

I am sure Kodak agents will see this announcement from a prominent cowboy, realize

their errors, and commit to supplying him with whatever he wants to make him feel

"appreciated." <BR><BR>

 

Ilford, on the other hand, will take solace when they remember this:

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CGkU">Jay

Johnson , may 21, 2005; 08:03 p.m.</a>

"My Leica M7 is regularly loaded with Ilford Delta 400, rated at EI 320 and processed in

Ilford DDX. It has NEVER seen a roll of color film and NEVER will. That would be the worst

sin anyone could possibly perpetrate. ;-)"

<BR><BR>

What a clown. Can't believe I wasted 10 minutes writing this, but at least it kept me away

from the depressing Katrina updates.

They make colour film now?!

i stopped using tri-x a few years ago, due to the fact that i don't LIKE tri-x.

 

i use a total of three kodak products. i use tmax 3200, kodafix, and the occasional roll of hie. and i mean VERY occasional. i find tmax 3200 to be about as grainy as my tri-x, or only moderately more so, with MUCH better contrast and a few stops better.