From the standpoint of quality control, placing Foma films in the same category as Kodak, especially TMax products, is utterly ludicrous. But I have a very high opinion of ACROS too, and solved any airbell issues in tray dev of sheet film long ago. Now there's just roll film anyway. Ilford is a reliable supplier. But if one needs color neg film or a high-performance black and white film like TMax, Kodak is well worth the extra price. I'm sure there will be some shoot-from-the-hip arguments; but go set up a process line accurate inside 1/10th deg F, and then do a few hundred densitometer plots, like I've done, and we'll see who has evidence and who doesn't . Sal and I frequently lock horns, but in this case we're mostly on the same wavelength about quality. Once a personal budget gets centered on 8x10 film, wild guesses just aren't practical.
Well, if I'm just out quickly snapshooting on a rainy day with a camera tucked under a parka, and either estimating exposure or doing TTL metering with a Nikon, TMax is not a smart choice. And the young employees at the local camera store hate it; but few of them even own a light meter or know how to use one. They're accustomed to histograms and the "latitude" of longer-toed, more forgiving films. But when one needs predictable long-scale tonal separation with considerable development flexibility in terms of contrast level, TMax films are the ticket. It's also a more robust film in terms of process handling than most, especially the sheet films. With color, Kodak's current color neg lineup is the best ever. No, I'm not happy about the high priced either; but it's a fact of life.
TMX and TMY are incredibly flexible - they can be made to do a wide variety of very desirable things.I’m not sure we are talking the same tmax, here.
TMX and TMY are not a flexible films. Especially not in development. Over cooking TMY and TMX is easily done.
Flexibility is HP5’s real name. Pushes and pulls extremely well, can take a beating in any developer and will always give a printable neg. You can’t do this with tmx nor tmy.
Fomapan 100, too, can take a beating and always come out looking good. Fomapan 400 is a different story.
TMX and TMY are incredibly flexible - they can be made to do a wide variety of very desirable things.
They just aren't particularly forgiving.
Well guess who did NOT buy 50 rolls of 120 kodak films and saved himself a lot of grief because of bad QC and potentially ruined photographs which could never be taken back?
Me.
Guess who decided to buy Foma and Ilford films instead, and came back with good photographs without any issues?
Me.
In Foma's case, it's so small it probably can't afford to perform the R&D to create modern products. HARMAN might have more resources, but its bean counters are smart enough to pencil out the ROI on new product development. That's where its "understanding" lies.
LoL, please stop spreading pathetic lies. What you’re doing is very dangerous and the culprit of the internet where, sadly, any BS is disguised as the truth.
I am simply going to give 3 quick facts, because I don’t have a minute more to spare on this Bullsheet.
1: foma never had paper backing issues while kodak struggled for years and couldn’t figure it out. Talk about rocket science problems.
2: foma 100’s look is the closest I have ever come to old tri-x. Foma 400 is indeed a direct competitor to sfx200 with its extended red sensitivity. You probably didn’t know that.
3: My 30 years of experience using film, which includes extensively using foma, tells me you’re talking total nonsense.
It may well be that a 15% increase is needed to keep Kodak afloat but may well not be the same to keep other manufacturers afloat. If this is the case then I fear for Kodak's ability to continue with such increases "unscathed" by consumer reaction. pentaxuser
Kodak TriX in the 30m Roll
And this was the price before the hike, it's old stock. Meanwhile, buying 20 135-36 films (more than what a 100 ft bulk roll would give) costs 150€ at the same shop.Right now in Fotoimpex the price is 189,00 EUR (210USD).
Right now in Fotoimpex the price is 189,00 EUR (210USD).
or maybe they're accurately reflecting their costs and risks involved in keeping and supplying a less popular product? Why ascribe greed or incompetence all the time? They’re just making a living.Either they are profiteering or plain stupid!
The price in the US is $100. Someone is clearly making a silly joke for asking that much.or maybe they're accurately reflecting their costs and risks involved in keeping and supplying a less popular product? Why ascribe greed or incompetence all the time? They’re just making a living.
And maybe the market outside the US is too small to make selling it at that price elsewhere untenable. Ok, we don’t like the price but that's the free market for ya. Buy individual rolls - maybe that's what Kodak wants you to do. In the end, as well as greed or incompetence there’s a third possibility - that Kodak and its distributors know exactly what they're doing to keep being able to supply film in the long term without going bust again.The price in the US is $100. Someone is clearly making a silly joke for asking that much
The price in the US is $100. Someone is clearly making a silly joke for asking that much.
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?