My experience, too. They don't even ask which one.
I have always had a hard time finding TX in 120, not TXP. The only walk-in store in which I have ever seen TX in 120 is Freestyle. Everywhere else, when you say "120 Tri-X", it is assumed you mean TXP, and the TX is not even stocked.
Over the past 10 years, their share price has gone from $60 per share to $6 per share... Kodak's debt to equity ratio is 66... For FY 2009 they had sales of 7.6 billion dollars... Only they lost 233 million dollars. That is a quarter billion dollar loss in one year.
Ironic, isn't it?
Wasn't the above nightmarish scenario precisely what they had hoped to avoid by decisively making the switch from analog to digital? By letting their former competitors become the last man (men) standing and drinking the ceremonial glass of cognac? By convincing me and everyone else to buy an Easyshare? Or cheap ink?
I wonder what went wrong??
Ken
The biggest fall the hardest. But I cling to my TMY-2 and Xtol.
...I never said 'lets punish Kodak and not use them'. I said they were not being smart by eliminating a staple film and the reasons from a lab perspective as to why TXP was not selling. STILL, @ 5% of their total films sales TXP sales is nothing to shake a stick at!...
You may be surprised to learn that our total TXP 320 -120 & 220 format production is less than 5% of our total Tri-X production, and it is this limited level of photographer and market demand that drive these sorts of difficult decisions.
Posted wirelessly..
Back in 2003, IIRC, the Great Yellow Father announced that they would remove themselves from the FILM business in seven years. Looks like they're right about on schedule to me.
I can also see David is concerned and upset about the decision, the impact on his livelihood, but I also see the plugging of a business mixed in the post.
I don't give a hoot if it's there or not (heck I don't even know what a DR5 is), but looks to me like there is a commercial there.
As do I to my forlorn Kodachrome.
Or at least my final eight rolls. I've finally been reduced by Kodak to trying to decide which of those remaining iconic boxed rolls will become my ceremonial "last man standing" unopened souvenir.
Ken
If you want film to stay around, why on earth would you condemn a great niche service provider like dr5 from saying what they do?
In 120/220, it probably is....There is a question here of 'profit' and 'losing money'. Is Kodak 'losing money' on TXP? I doubt it...
Given its fiduciary responsibility to Kodak shareholders, the answer is "the dollar" by law....Is Kodak committed to photography or the dollar?...
As much as I empathize with those that are losing their film, I've always thought of the 320 as the anemic and thin younger sibling of Tri-X. Never much liked the stuff and was always upset when some unknowing sales clerk gave me that instead of the real deal.TXP is one of the best B&W films on the market. I don't think that there is much of an argument to this fact in this arena.
Yes, they do and yes, it is. This was posted in another thread from Scott P. DiSabato at Kodak via David Goldfarb...These grown men and women know how to do their jobs. In this circumstance, this is not just a numbers game.
All I can say to this is... YUCK!...given a choice between 'TX' & 'TXP', Kodak should pick the better of these 2 films and make TXP the "TriX" film across the board.
The above is not true I'm afraid. According to the email from (there was a url link here which no longer exists), TXP production was less than 5% of total Tri-X production, not total film:
That changes the scenario dramatically, doesn't it?
As much as I empathize with those that are losing their film, I've always thought of the 320 as the anemic and thin younger sibling of Tri-X. Never much liked the stuff and was always upset when some unknowing sales clerk gave me that instead of the real deal.
Yes, they do and yes, it is. This was posted in another thread from Scott P. DiSabato at Kodak via David Goldfarb...
"You may be surprised to learn that our total TXP 320 -120 & 220 format production is less than 5% of our total Tri-X production, and it is this limited level of photographer and market demand that drive these sorts of difficult decisions. Kodak will continue to offer products where photographer demand makes it a viable offering within our professional film portfolio."
I too am a small business person and I would say they've made a pretty sound, although disappointing decision.
All I can say to this is... YUCK!
For this weekend, I've decided to resort to 35mm and Tri-X 400. It will be sufficient for this project. After that, I don't know. I'll figure something out. I absolutely hate Tmax with a passion, so it won't be that. I am not terribly fond of Tri-X 400, but it may be the lesser evil. I do plan to do more tests with HP5; it's never been my favorite, but maybe I can find a way to like it more. The biggest pain factor is that whatever I go to will have to be 120. I resent that.
I just can't believe that there is no other 220 B&W option. Unbelievable.
I can also see David is concerned and upset about the decision, the impact on his livelihood, but I also see the plugging of a business mixed in the post.
How is it that sheet sales of the emulsion are stable, but not medium format? If anything, I have always had a hard time finding TX in 120, not TXP. The only walk-in store in which I have ever seen TX in 120 is Freestyle. Everywhere else, when you say "120 Tri-X", it is assumed you mean TXP, and the TX is not even stocked.
As much as I empathize with those that are losing their film, I've always thought of the 320 as the anemic and thin younger sibling of Tri-X.
Unfortunately we do. We speak with our pocketbooks and wallets and apparently we're not speaking loud enough to keep the machines running. All the organizing and letter writing in the world isn't going to do any good unless people are buying the product. A very sad fact for people that do what we do...it would seem more constructive and productive to take advantage of that strength by coordinating a collective effort to influence decisions made by corporations such as Kodak...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?