Problems can be overcome.
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
What Films Would You Like To See Kodak Re-Introduce Again? And why?
-
A
- Thread starter braxus
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Fuji GW670 III
- Started by campy51
-
For Sale Hasselblad X Pan w/ 45mm/f4 Lens
- Started by eftones
-
For Sale 6 antique French pneumatic shutters _ Guerry
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Voigtländer Nokton Classic 35mm/1.4 with Leica M-mount
- Started by Klaus Mähring
-
For Sale Voigtländer Bessa R2 Special Edition Olive Green
- Started by Klaus Mähring
Forum statistics
Problems can be overcome.
Kodak will have to handle it themselves.
Those were wonderful
If my favorite TMY wasn’t available I can do with Delta, or HP5+ for TX, but the Kodachrome 64 color palette is so unique there’s no substitute.
Yes, you can get many B&W films to resemble one another by altering your processing, but it doesn't make them exactly alike. I have heard people say what's said above, that Verichrome Pan was basically a cheapened down Plus-X. I have no way of proving that one way or the other, but I always got nice results or results at least that I liked anyway, from Verichrome Pan. I remember running a simple test just after I got my Hasselblad 500C (w/80mm f2.8 Planar) where I loaded one back with Verichrome Pan, one with the old Tri-X and one with Plus-X. I wet printed the results on Ilford Ilfobrom G2. The results were that I really liked the Verichrome Pan the best or maybe close to a tie with Tri-X and Plus-X, while very nice, just didn't seem to do it like Verichrome Pan. I also remember the developer I used for all three films was Kodak Microdol. Not sure if it was Microdol-X or just plain Microdol at that time.
OP
OP
I get that, as I noticed a change from the 2003 film to the later version afterwards. The old stuff had way better tone separation, possibly from more silver in the emulsion that was later taken out?
But that said Tri-X is not discontinued as the posts would allude to.
What film is this 25 Pan? Do you mean Panatomic-X or a different emulsion?
I would love HIE to come back. I have some still, even a full box of 4x5. I'm not sure if the 4x5 is still okay. I'll be testing it in a month or so. I paid too much for it but was willing to take the chance.
I do agree that it is "niche in a niche" for large format.
I love the halation as well as the IR spectral response.
I'm not holding my breath for it.
I do agree that it is "niche in a niche" for large format.
I love the halation as well as the IR spectral response.
I'm not holding my breath for it.
A friend gifted me a lot of the old Kodak black and white films mentioned here. I'm lucky I'll get to test them some day.
MattKing
Moderator
Verichrome and then its successor Verichrome Pan was an older style of emulsion designed to optimize latitude for what is now referred to as medium format in box cameras like the Brownie Hawkeye.
As film improved, and amateur cameras went toward smaller formats like 35mm, the old Verichrome Pan was changed and replaced - essentially they re-used the Plus-X emulsion, but saved money on the anti-halation methods used. In both versions of Verichrome Pan that added the additional benefit of effectively improving latitude when used in simple cameras.
The improvement in latitude came at the costs of reduced sharpness and more grain - not much of a concern with a Brownie Hawkeye.
It was the latter version of Verichrome Pan that most of us had most of our experience with.
Some highspeed pushable E6 film, aka Ektachrome P1600
Cinestill sells Double X in 35mm and 120. I wouldn’t mind Kodak selling it directly in those formats, but I don’t think there’s much call to do so when Cinestill — obviously in coordination with Kodak — already does so.
No, it was not. It was adapted for a new coating machine.
No, nothing whatsoever to do with the silver/m² level. In fact, it almost never has had to do with the silver/m² level, but rather to do with emulsion redesigns for various reasons (some environmental, some about massively reducing manufacturing wastage), and/ or the reduction of latitude for gross end user ineptitude.
What you are seeing is essentially a move to even more tightly controlled uniformity of crystal character within each 3D crystal emulsion used. The older emulsion was slightly more polydisperse in comparison, and thus less good at the granularity-to-information-content/transmission characteristics etc.
The new material is far better, if you are not very sloppy at the basics and expecting Kodak to pick up after your errors.
MattKing
Moderator
That is a bit harsh @Lachlan Young .
An Instamatic 104, Brownie Starmite or Brownie Hawkeye weren't exactly designed to offer the user fine control!
Verichrome Pan was perfect for those cameras.
I don't know the date of the addition of "Pan" to the old Verichrome, but my father used it for family photos in his Target 616 in the 50's. The first roll I shot was in 1959+ in a plastic "Sputnik" 127 camera. I continued to use Verichrome Pan until it was discontinued. The last roll of fresh Vericrome Pan I shot was in my first Kodak Medalist II.
Lachlan is right about a lot the folks that used Verichome Pan, but it wasn't from them liking it because they were sloppy or just didn't give a shit about their exposures. Most of the folks I knew in my rural area couldn't afford a real fancy camera and were stuck with old box or folding Kodaks with no meter whatsoever. If you were well off, you might just be lucky enough to own a Argus C3 back then
MattKing
Moderator
I miss the "real" Ektapan sheet film, the one that was discontinued, not the rebranded stuff they call Ektapan now. Used to develop it in DK50 or HC-110. It was lovely...
25 ISO Kodak B&W….
No it's not. I'm talking about bulk film only, here in Europe
You certainly can buy Kodak bulk 35mm film....but it is so expensive that few outlets bother offering it. That said, even in Europe, there are enough people who are fans specifically of Kodak B&W film that you can get it if you look.
I miss Kodachrome but I accept it's never coming back. the process was heinously complicated, environmentally dodgy and far too expensive to consider constructing machines to resume it.
The love for Verichrome Pan is because the stuff appears to be indestructible. I've shot 65 year old VP and got decent results out of it. I've found 50-70 year old VP in cameras I've bought and processed it successfully, yielding images from the 50s, 60s and 70s. Something so long-lived would be welcome.
Add me to the voices who miss Plus-X, especially in super 8.
I believe the world of analogue photography would be a lot better with a higher speed Ektachrome on the market.
I'd occasionally buy super 8 sound cartridges if they were ever relaunched (only slightly more realistic than Kodachrome, though).
Never heard of it.
In the low ISO range everything has been discontinued: Agfapan 25, Orwo NP15, Kodak Panatomic X (which was ISO 32). Panatomic X would be great to be availiable again.
I wish you were right! But for any film to be successful now, it has to sell worldwide so we are talking about several processing lines around the world, each one dedicated only to Kodachrome. A single lab in the US just won't cut it and the US-only market is too small. Shipping to the US has become more difficult/expensive, and shipping costs from the US are also very high, so non-US users need a local lab.
Oh yes. Ektar 25 was great.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |