Jump to content

Some Kodak film to "Retire"


Recommended Posts

<p>Kodak is "retiring" (as they are calling it) Tri-X 320 in the 120 and the 220 size. A contact of mine confirmed that the 4X5 size is staying. He also told me that Plus-X may be gone in the future. I don't think people shot as much of this as the other Kodak black and white so I think I'll agree with Kodak. It is unfortunate that the 220 is going though. No more 220 black and white. They still offer Portra and Ektachrome in 220 though. Here is the link to Kodak's announcement. <a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/filmAnnouncements.jhtml?pq-path=13319/2300263">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/filmAnnouncements.jhtml?pq-path=13319/2300263</a></p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>According to Kodak:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>TRI-X 320 Films (320TXP) feature excellent tone<br /> gradation and brilliant highlights. They are especially well<br /> suited to low-flare interior lighting or flash illumination.<br /> They are also useful for portraiture with low-contrast<br /> backlighting outdoors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The primary advantage of Tri-X 320 was, then, in studio work?--but how does regular Tri-X 400 work in the same setting? I confess I've never used the 320 film. I realize this is all moot, but I am just curious (yellow).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The news about TXP 220 is not good. I just bought what looks like a NOS Nikor wide spaced 220 reel. It is from the Honeywell era and the instruction sheet has a 1969 date code. I don't imagine that too many people use TXP 120 and the ones like me who use TXP 220 do so because it's the only 220 b&w film. I would prefer regular Tri-X in 220. If Fuji would sell Neopan 400 in 220 size that would be fine too. Where Plus-X is concerned we at least have FP4+ as a replacement. I don't think I will ever really like TMX. I can tolerate it in Microphen. ACROS is easier for me to use. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no...don't tell me Plus-X might be disappearing too! That is my favorite black and white film. I use it all the time. Seriously, if Kodak ever does actually discontinue Plus-X, I won't buy any more Kodak films. That would be the last straw. And that would mean that they would haven't any more low ISO B&W films, wouldn't it?

 

This is so aggravating. Kodak keeps saying publicly that they have no plans to discontinue a film, but then someone's "contact" will email them and contradict everything that Kodak is saying publicly. I read somewhere that Kodak would never discontinue Plus-X or Tri-X because those are their most popular black and white films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>B&W portrait films, of which 320TXP is the "last". are designed for low-key portraits. You want compressed shadows, but more contrast in the highlights -- which are the skin tones. So 320TXP has an "upswept" HD curve. You normally develop them for a rather thin negative, that you can "read newsprint" through. Otherwise the highlights block up.<br>

There's probably very little of that sort of portraiture going on in 120 and 220 sizes, what there is is probably in 4x5 size. So they can't sell enough master rolls of the film on the thin 120/220 support, so they throw too much out each year. The 4x5 320TXP obviously sells better than the 120/220.<br>

Honestly, I'd expect that Kodak might have better Tri-X sales if they punted 320TXP entirely, and made only 400TX in all the sizes. Could lower costs as well, as there would be only one formula to keep "in tune", the one for 400TX. Right now, if you want a conventional 4x5 sheet film with a normal S-curve HD curve, the only choice is Ilford HP5+.<br>

On the other hand, then there would be no B&W portrait films available. Kodak would really you rather buy 400TMX if you don't want an upswept curve on sheet film.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Here, at least, Plus X will not be missed. But no more Tri X 320? That is my favorite film, by far, in all sizes. C'mon guys, is that the way it will be? You owe us. We have kept you in business for many, many years, even when you had the 2nd rate product in a certain field. I can use another film, but have been loyal to Eastman Kodak, because it is an American company. Guess what? YOU DISCONTINUE MY FAVORITE FILM, AND YOUR NAME IS BANNED HERE. NO MORE D76, NO MORE RAPID FIXER, NO MORE EKTACHROME. I AM SERiOUS! NO MORE RECOMMENDING YOU TO STUDENTS, NO MORE ANYTHING. YOU WILL HAVE BECOME THE ENEMY, AND THIS IS ONE PHOTO EDUCATOR WHO WILL BAN YOU ENTIRELY. AND NO MORE FOREIGN DIGITAL CAMERAS WITH SENSORS MADE BY YOU OR ROYALTIES PAID TO YOU. You need to learn the importance of the total picture (pun intended), and stop fixating on individual products. JERKS! Wake the heck up and learn how to market yourselves! Eastman Kodak has become pathetic. George Eastman would disown you! You have become a typical American company"What is my bonus, when can I get it, and screw the company and the world". May you all be given a real dose of reality, soon, unless you are too stupid to hear it, creeps.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've suffered the discontinuation of Panatomic X, High Speed Infrared, Ektachrome Infrared, Ektachrome 200, and Kodachrome...but I'm with Chris. If Kodak discontinues Plus X in 35mm or 120, I will never buy a roll of Kodak film again. I wish they would just declare bankruptcy and move to China and sell crappy Digital cameras and cheap camera bags. That seems to be the only products they think Americans are interested in. Maybe they're right. But I won't support them. And further I will discourage any of my Photography students from supporting such a badly managed corporation.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>No no, Plus-X is not mentioned in the discontinuation at all.</p>

<p>Plus-X is still on the Kodak site in the available films area. Even B&H doesn't think Plus-X is discontinued. They're selling it in 620 even. Good thing, too, if they killed that I'd be seriously pissed off.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Hey - think about this:<br>

Kodak discontinues a film because enough people aren't buying it,<br>

so then people decide to boycott all Kodak film?</p>

<p>Seems like a great way to encourage companies to keep film in production. 8-(</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well I hope buying Arista 100 Premium which is supposed to be Plus-X will help! That's the only way I can afford a bulk roll of it. And the Super 8 Reversal plus X we use in film class. it's incredible stuff; the new Super 8 plus-X formula looks like 16mm! Every time I shoot some black and white real film anything, and get a stunned reaction from students at how incredibly unique and beautiful this stuff looks, I just shake my head. This stuff obviously provokes a positive response from college photography students who would become new film Evangelists. WAKE UP ROCHESTER, AND SIMPLY MARKET YOUR PRODUCTS!!!<br>

JDM the point is, if Kodak doesn't make anything I like buying anymore, then why would I give them my money? I'm sorry for the people who loved TX 320. I used it and liked it. Every time Kodak kills off a film they kill off a future customer.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm not trying to start or perpetuate any rumors. Plus-X is NOT being discontinued <i>right now</i>. I'm only going on what Patrick got from his "contact" at Kodak. Read his post again. <p>

 

<b>"He also told me that Plus-X may be gone in the future."</b> <p>

 

What <i>exactly</i> does that mean? Is it just some random guy who works for Kodak giving his opinion? Did he hear rumors? Or is Kodak actually thinking about dicontinuing Plus-X some day in the future? And are we talking about next year? 5 years from now? 10 years from now? Or maybe never? <p>

 

Patrick...can you please check with whoever your "contact" is and get more info about Plus-X? This is actually really important to me personally, because I use Plus-X <b>all the time</b>. In fact, I have a big collection of antique cameras with a slower shutter speed, and for some of them Plus-X is really the only option I have for a Kodak black and white film. Otherwise, I'm going to have to look at other options, like Ilford. <p>

 

I also can't imagine Plus-X ever disappearing. I mean, supposedly isn't the new Arista Premium 100, that Freestyle sells, actually re-labeled Plus-X?

 

I don't want to hear "just keep buying it and they'll keep making it." I'm already buying as much film as I can afford. Every time I buy black and white film, it's almost always Plus-X.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It really is nothing new that Kodak and other film makers have dropped emulsions when sales wane; its basic business. In like manner; if in your own business you are losing money with a product or service; sane folks drop this lossy part.<br /><br />Kodak dropped Kodachrome in sheet sizes over 1/2 century ago; it once was available in 11x14 sizes.<br /><br />Kodak subsidized 828 and 620 and 616 for many years when sales were nil; when the Kodak management was more pro film; these products died too.<br /><br />Super-X in sheets got axed; a great film for shooting glassware with its super long shoulder for great highlights. Again; sales were nil.<br /><br />Kodak dropped disc and some cried too :)<br /><br />Kodak axed process camera films; papers over a decade ago; again due to lack of sales. Process cameras got obsoleted by digital; back 2 decades ago B&W scanners and giant "Xerox type" digital printers came out. Our 58K buck scan print unit back in 1992 was the first coffin nail with our 17 foot long 24x36" negative process camera. In the hay day of process work; say 1960's/70's; there were about 6 makers of films; by say 1990 there were only 2; Kodak and Fuji. Products got dropped; sales dropped; prices rose; *PLUS* old fart customers for print shops did NOT want to pay more for process work.<br>

The childish whine-bitching today with still camera films dropping is what happened 15 years ago with process camera materials. I mentioned this on a Greenspun thread over a decade ago and got flamed; ie that digital would reduce the number of film products sold. Heck most folks do NOT run a business; thus making a profit does NOT make any sense to them.<br /><br />Old 4x5 film pack was still around in the mid 1970's; it died due to lack of sales too.<br /><br />Many ancient spectral glass plates Kodak sold have been dropped over the decades; as sales dropped. Most all of this stuff was special order; it took months; one got in packed in dry ice.<br /><br />For copy camera work the super great professional copy films got axed as flatbed scanners and photoshop became the norm; ie it passed up the Adams retouching machine. These copy camera materials were for shooting a negative of a photo/print; they captured the image well; plus they had a retouching base.<br /><br />3x4 lantern slide camera film got axed; as sales dropped.<br /><br />5x7 films got dropped over the decades too.<br /><br />As check sorters went digital; the microfilm product that supported this got axed.<br /><br />When NOAA radio went digital about a decade ago; the 3M 8-track tape line got mothballed/axed in the twin cities; ie again due to lack of sales.</p>

<p>Panatomic-x got axed due to lack of sales.<br>

Royal-x got axed due to lack of sales.<br>

127 products got axed due to lack of sales.<br /><br />Most folks on Photo.net do not run an actual business; thus they are at the 1st grade level in understanding profits; or return on investment.<br /><br />Products die due to lack of sales. Your can write all the tear jerker letters you want to have a maker produce pet rocks; space food sticks. mirrors for a 1949 Nash. What really matters is actual sales. These sales support your products life; whining does not.<br /><br />In like manner your grocery store may drop some food group that does not sell; it rots on the shelf. Film is a product like food; it does NOT last forever. Paltry sales of one paint color; food type; or film type get *looked at* by managment; when the long tern trend is more and more losses; at some point the product gets dropped and the few token last users whine.<br /><br />Ask yourself how long you will shoot images at a loss since folks still want your services.<br /><br />Would you still buy these dropped products if the price was doubled?; most folks will not.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Plus-X has already been dropped in sheet film sizes, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Kodak had already decided to axe it in roll film. They always wait until supplies are nearly depleted before they make an announcement, and in the meantime they will say that a film is current with a straight face. The only thing we can trust about Kodak is that they can't cope with small-scale production; they scrapped their equipment and invested in equipment which requires either large product runs or none. They refuse to replace the equipment, so small-scale production is dead. Frankly, I've had it with Kodak and their inept management. Ilford is a company which cares more about photography and deserves our business.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Film makers have dropped plates and films that did not sell well since the beginning of photography; it is a century plus ancient event.<br>

<br />Film formats have come and go; Kodapack/126 came in 1963; it helped kill off the basic 620 box camera where many folks got double exposures.<br>

<br />Bantum/828 came and went away<br>

<br />Postcard sized 116/616 came and went away; it made easy to make contact prints.<br>

<br />127 came and is about gone; in 4x4cm it made nice Super slides; with Joe Six pack; it was used in the Brownie Bullet.<br>

<br />With LF most all the film ever shot was without movements; the bulk of stuff shot was for press/news work; weddings; portraits. Todays LF user now thinks LF is only about movements. LF today is mostly amateurs; in the past it was for mostly all pros. With LF we lost the fast press materials; ie Royal-X at asa 1250. One lost the quick film pack films.<br>

Todays LF shooter is a slower shooter; ie amateur artsy landsacpe stuff. In LF's heyday; one shot portraits with LF to have a giant retouchable negative. In press sports work LF cameras had faster lenses too. Here my 210mm F3.5 Xenar from 50 years ago is faster than today 210mm F5.6 Xenar that a landscape shoot may use.<br>

<br />Emulsion types and formats they are packaged in witll continue to be reviewed; with lossy products dropped. *Actual sales* can be used to support these products; they cannot pay workers and the light bill with whiny tear jerker letters.<br>

<br />One can look back 50 years ago and there were many film makers; today there are only a few.</p>

<p><br />If your local store drops Barney Purple paint that you like do you boycott the store too?<br>

<br />If your local store drops Space Food Sticks that you like do you boycott the store too?<br>

<br />If your local store drops iZone film that you like do you boycott the store too?<br>

<br />If your local store drops 110 film that you like do you boycott the store too?</p>

<p><br />If your local store drops Jazz Discs that you like do you boycott the store too?<br>

<br />If your local store drops Lard in 30Lb pails that you like do you boycott the store too?<br>

<br />Businesses need profits to stay alive; this is a foreign concept to most folks on Photo.net</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Kodak has maintained small scale production on some pro products where the end user is willing to pay the price required to support the nill/small production.<br>

This goes back a century to the glass plate era. With spectral plates and astro plates the end user prepaid for the product in many cases.<br>

The real isuse is that amateurs do not understand business at all; they want a handout; ie welfare. Products that are marginal in sales are going to be axed; this goes back to the cave man era. Many will never understand this; many have never run a lemonaid stand and have this *profits are evil* mindset.<br>

One can go back 5000 years ago and some product that has a limited shelf life that does not not sell well gets dropped. Probably folks whined then too.<br>

Ideally you want your beloved film or beer maker to stock fresh Royal-X in 828 Bantum in 2020; plus Billy Beer too in Pony cans. Ideally you another to run a loss.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>People, people, this is a rumor. When someone posts "a contact told me" that is simply someone that is insecure and needs attn., please do not feed into rumors like this and there will be plenty of time to post your feelings on these issues when and IF the Orig. Mfr, in this case Kodak, puts out a press release with facts.<br>

Posts like this help no one and many more times then not, they are empty rumors.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I do get the impression that Plus-X isn't a high priority for Kodak. The B&W front page features T-Max 100 and 400, Tri-X and 400CN, and Plus-X and T-Max 3200 are in an "other" area at the bottom. They push T-Max because they love talking about fine grain, but I don't love the look of the stuff.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...