advertisement


RIP: Kodak

Hopefully they aren't doomed yet... Perhaps Magnum can step in and buy the Tri-X production facilities :)
 
Nic,

Do they still have a unique purpose without Kodachrome?:)
Click to expand...
Tri-X and X-tol, but it's admittedly a niche within a niche within a niche.

Joe
 
Big shame, I work in the film industry and although we shoot some digital stuff we still largely shoot film. While it seems we will carry on being able to get stock for some time it's worth noting that because of the huge number of rolls of film that were bought by the photo taking public, the rolls of film we needed were cheaper due to those market forces. Without this, shooting on film gets more expensive and producers will force more DOP's to shoot digitally. I don't intend to pass comment on which is better but it sure was nice having both techniques at your disposal :-( Sad day indeed, but alas it's been coming for a long time, kudos for them having survived for so long.

Stefan
 
The slightly sad thing is that it's Kodak's mismanagement of their digital asset base that has killed them. Film is still a profitable, but ultimately small in their context, sideline.

I too like xtol and have a very soft spot for the Portra films.

Mike
 
Actually they've filed under Chapter 11 for protection from creditors. An attempt to avoid an ultimate bankruptcy by being protected for a period while they reorganise and try to make a go of the business.

Perhaps could be thought of as a self administered administration.

Mike
 
I know someone who will dance on their grave. A mate ran a company, that started in Canada, re-processing developer chemicals. Huge interest from labs for their services as it saved a lot of money and had green credentials but Kodak threatened all their minilabs. Use this company and lose your Kodak franchise was the message so their sales dropped off and it ultimately killed his business.
 
matthewr said:
I rad somewhere that Tri-X is not your Father's Tri-X as they started skimping on the amount of silver they put in it to save some cash or something?
Click to expand...

Iirc the large format stuff is still the original formulation or thereabouts, but it's slower film. The MF and 35mm is a different formula, but again, iirc it's faster film so not sure the change was necessarily about making savings.
 
Well, I could be wrong - I think the MF/LF stuff is 320, and it doesn't make sense for the sensitivity to change with format. So perhaps the old stuff was rated at 400 but actually closer to 320, and the newer formulation (used only in 35mm) is now actually 400.

Wasn't it normal to shoot Tri-X at less than it's rated film speed and over-develop?
 
orangeart said:
Big shame, I work in the film industry and although we shoot some digital stuff we still largely shoot film. While it seems we will carry on being able to get stock for some time it's worth noting that because of the huge number of rolls of film that were bought by the photo taking public, the rolls of film we needed were cheaper due to those market forces. Without this, shooting on film gets more expensive and producers will force more DOP's to shoot digitally. I don't intend to pass comment on which is better but it sure was nice having both techniques at your disposal :-( Sad day indeed, but alas it's been coming for a long time, kudos for them having survived for so long.

Stefan
Click to expand...

Hi Stefan.

I was wondering what the film Industry will do re this news. What's the ratio of film/dig shooting on a typical film these days and can we tell one which is after the post production?
 
Dan,

Tri-X 320 and 400 are different emulsions, though they are not as different as, say, TMax and Tri-X.

Kodak product info said:
KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 320 and 400 Films are high-speed panchromatic films that are a good choice for photographing dimly lighted subjects or fast action, for photographing subjects that require good depth of field and fast shutter speeds, and for extending the distance range for flash pictures.

TRI-X 400 Film (400TX) is available in 120 and 135 sizes and 35 and 70 mm long rolls. You can retouch the 120-size film on the emulsion side. TRI-X 400 Film is recommended for push-processing applications.

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

One TRI-X 320 Film (320TXP) is available in 120 and 220 sizes on a 3.9-mil acetate base, the other is available in sheets on a 7-mil ESTAR Thick Base. You can retouch these films on the emulsion or base side.
Click to expand...

On photonet, someone described the differences as...

Tri-X 320 is a long-toe film while 400 is a medium-toe film. The long-toe film gives up some shadow separation but makes up with slightly better separation (increased contrast) in the highlights.
Click to expand...

FWIW, Tri-X 320 was discontinued almost two years ago.

Joe
 
<confused>

So to summarize, 320TXP no longer exists and the 400TX is used across all formats, i.e. MF TRI-X ain't your Dad's TRI-X. Your Dad's TRI-X no longer exists.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top