1. Please read the postings you refer to. No one has used the sentence "these films are for everyone".
But all photographers here in this thread who have really used these films say that they have not had severe problems using them.
We with experience say using these films is quite easy, you with no experience with this type of films are saying it is difficult.
Dear "Film-Niko",
I saw many negatives and prints from these films, and many friends of mine used them. They shared their experiences, and I can tell you that most of them are pretty experienced people that I can count on. Most of them stopped using this type of films after a while, the word 'disenchantment' describes quite well what they say. Only very few of them use them from time to time.
Most of them said things like these:
- Results were not consistent.
- There were streaks and cloudy areas.
- Shooting at higher apertures than 5.6 ruins the shots due to diffraction.
- The difference between these specialty films and normal films does not justify the high costs.
- The images look 'digital'.
I don't have to pay money to find out that I don't like something if it's obvious that I won't like it. If you love "Klingon Blood Stew" that does not mean that everyone's mouth starts to water when you mention it.
Nobody said "these films are for everyone" literally. But in many posts that you can read here the problems that were visible in many photos and heard from many people were trivialized, and I simply remind people that they better don't spend money for a method that might be half-baked or only suitable for very experienced users.
You describe yourself and the others that like these films as "We with experience".
Do I need to say more? Just don't seduce beginners or people with less experience to follow that road. This is not a crusade, this is a forum for photographers to help each other. It's not made for you and a handful of others to proclaim that the Peoples' Front of Judea is much better than the Judean People's Front. Splitter.
2. What we critize is that you are permanently bashing films you have never used. No experience at all on your side.
Again: A forum is for talking about real experiences, not for propagating prejudices.
I am not bashing films.
I am bashing the fact that some people mislead other users to do things that they might regret.
I am bashing evangelists that deny problems and praise products as if it were their own.
You have started advertising here by permanently bashing products you have never used (and which are from manufacturers you don't like in general),...
First of all, criticism is not advertising, it's more like the opposite
Secondly, if you are happy with your film and developer, why do you care as long as you don't want to sell your story or a film? What happens if someone does not like your Porsche? What if he does not want to buy one to find out that it has a small trunk and needs a lot of fuel? What if he explains that a Porsche is not for a novice driver? Will you start an online flame war against that critic because he does not have a Porsche and does not see how great it is to drive at 55 mph in a car that is fast enough for the racing track? Or will you declare that he is probably a Volkswagen marketing agent because he recommended not to sell Porsches to novice drivers?
A Porsche driver might say "So, what, that critic does not want to know how great this car is... look at that.. that's a sexy turn-signal lever..."
But only a Porsche dealer or a megalomaniac Porsche sermonizer on drugs would start to talk about the critic's life of sin and depravity.
Of course, an Agfa Copex Rapid is not the equivalent of a Porsche...
...and by repeating of impudent marketing lies from Kodak (TMX being the sharpest, finest grained BW film, which it has never been, even at it's introduction time Kodak Technical Pan, Agfa APX 25 and Agfaortho 25 all had better sharpness, higher resolution and finer grain).
First of all, I use more Acros than Tmax 100 for landscapes recently - PE, forgive me
For street photography in bright daylight I started using Orwo NP54 movie stock film, comparable to Kodak 5222. If I need more speed I switched from Tri-X to Tmax 400, an outstanding film, but that, of course, is only an individual opinion and has nothing to do with reality:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
In this thread I used Tmax 100 as an example; think "Delta 100" or "Acros" every time I said "Tmax", okay? Do you feel better now? Wipe away the foam from your mouth, please.
Don't you think that in today's competitive world Ilford and Fuji would ask their lawyers to rain on Kodak's parade if Kodak would spread "impudent marketing lies"? Of course, they all have the finest, sharpest film, that's an ongoing story since Daguerre. But their marketing guys will always watch what the others do and start a lawsuit if a competitor goes too far.
Secondly, you compare apples with
historic oranges. None of the films you mention is still available. Kodak Technical Pan, Agfa APX 25 and Agfaortho 25, aren' they all gone?
If we talk about today's films that are made for general photography and can be processed with half-way normal developers you must not omit that you want to talk about document films that need special treatment. That's not a different species, it's a different genus, so you even compare normal apples with a duck-billed platypus.
Don't forget to mention that Agfa Copex Rapid is not available as perforated 35mm films since years. If you don't believe this call some microfilm dealers and ask them for perforated 35mm Copex. They will tell you just that: it's not available as a new, fresh product. If you don't believe that call Agfa, they will confirm this.
Whatever is in the market must be old stock that is being marketed aggressively. How long will supplies last? Nobody knows.
By the way, if you lust for some unperforated Copex...
Here is a thread with some information about using unperforated 35mm film:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Fresh unperforated film is dirt cheap. So was perforated film when it was still available. Someone makes a killing by cutting old perforated stock, selling it with a humongous markup. You get 305 meter rolls (ca. 1,000 feet) for about 130 Euros, enough for 190 films, 36 frames, 0.69 Euros per film, have fun!
Of course, I did not try that
You are well known for bashing products you have never used on different forums and spamming threads with Kodak marketing.
You are sitting in a glasshouse, you should not throw stones.
In fact I am better known for a few other things:
#1: For shouting "Jehova" if half the world wants to stone someone.
#2: For playing hardball with people who abuse a forum to advertise for free.
#3: For knowing the difference between criticism and personal attacks. Criticism is about facts or opinions, there is no need to get personal.
By the way, do you know the difference between criticism and libel? Libel is a personal attack and not a discussion on the topic.
In other words: don't get cute with me
We better get back to topic, don't you agree?
---
PS: thx to Ronald and jnanian