KODAK - BRING BACK Tmax 3200 !!! Asap pls.

[BrianShaw]

That would be a completely useless film for me.

Still no interest. Oh well.

 

[Anon Ymous]

No need for TMax P3200 at all. How about answering this question first: while it was available, why didn't people buy it?

People didn't buy it in the quantities that Kodak wanted back when it was discontinued. If they have streamlined their manufacturing process and/or feel that there is money to be made by producing it, then why not? By the same token, there's no need for many 100, or 400ISO films either.

I really don't understand how bringing back a film and showing commitment to film can be bad in any way.

 

[wyofilm]

I really don't understand how bringing back a film and showing commitment to film can be bad in any way.

I'm not predicting bad sales for this film or anything. But there are plenty of reasons why bringing back a film can be bad. For one, bad sales of the new product and not recouping costs. Two, competing against your own existing products. (My camera still only shoots one roll of film at a time!) Three, if the newly released film sucks (I'm not predicting this for P3200), then the whole lines films can suffer. Four, taking away from other internal projects like releasing Ektachrome! Oops! Strike four, I believe this is one reason WHY they released P3200. To mitigate the never to return Ektachrome.

 

[BrianShaw]

People didn't buy it in the quantities that Kodak wanted back when it was discontinued. If they have streamlined their manufacturing process and/or feel that there is money to be made by producing it, then why not? By the same token, there's no need for many 100, or 400ISO films either.

I really don't understand how bringing back a film and showing commitment to film can be bad in any way.

Bringing back an old film is a good thing. But based on the lack of information we have I'd guess (just as likely as any other guess, I suppose) that they are cleaning out an old freezer...

There is a very good reason why they discontinued the film about 5 years ago and, aside a few enthusiasts that express themselves here, I can't imagine much of a general purpose interest for this kind of product. Maybe their market research says differently but I've never seen any of their market research.

 

[halfaman]

Ilford Delta 3200 is a low contrast ISO 800-1000 film, Kodak TMax 3200 was the same but with a normal contrast and bigger grain at the same sensitivity. If this is just reintroducing the discontiued film I am not excited either, but I wish good luck to Kodak with it anyway

Fuji Neopan 1600... that would be great news.

 

[RattyMouse]

What you're saying is ridiculous, how the hell is a wider choice of films bad, seriously?? and it's not going to make the market weaker, if anything perhaps people who have tried D3200 and didn't like it, will like P3200, that means more film being sold.
Once again, some people on this forum try to turn good news into bad news.

It's real simple. Film productions requires a vast economy of scale to make it suitably profitable for the manufacturer. Ilford is the ONE company on the planet where photographic film is their core business. Without film, Ilford does not exist. The other two companies have been very vocal and demonstrative about how film is not their core business.

While film use is growing, it is growing in very very tiny steps. We are NOT returning to the glory days when millions upon millions upon millions of people shoot film. Therefore, an increase in supply of film represents a significant dilution of the customer base. Ilford will most certainly sell less D3200, possibly a lot less. Many salivate and buying anything, absolutely anything, with a K on it. It does not matter that this resurrected film is hardly any improvement at all over Delta 3200. It just has a K on it. That's all it takes. It is very dangerous to weaken the one company who is truly dedicated enough to make film their core business.

More choice can be bad. It is certainly not automatic that it is good. That's too simplistic in thinking.

 

[RattyMouse]

Bringing back an old film is a good thing. But based on the lack of information we have I'd guess (just as likely as any other guess, I suppose) that they are cleaning out an old freezer...

There is a very good reason why they discontinued the film about 5 years ago and, aside a few enthusiasts that express themselves here, I can't imagine much of a general purpose interest for this kind of product. Maybe their market research says differently but I've never seen any of their market research.

There's no way this is old stock...no way. That would be beyond the pale.

 

[eddie]

While I don’t shoot much 35mm, or high speed film, the fact that a major player introduced/reintroduced an emulsion made my day. It’s potential proof that my chosen form of creative expression is believe ever to be viable. Regardless of how it plays out, today we film folks are seen as having legs...

 

[Sirius Glass]

More film choices the better. Now how about in 120 and 4"x5"?

 

[michaelfoto]

I don't get all this negativity and hostility. Kodak is bringing back a very nice film with great sharpnes and tonality.
This shot i took a couple of weeks ago at a jazz/blues session. The film expireded 1993 and has not been consistently cooled all the time. I exposed it as ISO 1200 and developed it as ISO 1600. My first try with this great film, and I immediately felt sad, that is was discontinued.
By now all my prayers seemed to be heard by Kodak.
I am happy!

Vocal by Michael G, on Flickr

Kind regards Michael.
Click on it and you will be taken to a higher resolution picture at Flickr.

 

[Nihil Abstat]

Ilford Delta 3200 is a low contrast ISO 800-1000 film, Kodak TMax 3200 was the same but with a normal contrast and bigger grain at the same sensitivity. If this is just reintroducing the discontiued film I am not excited either, but I wish good luck to Kodak with it anyway

Fuji Neopan 1600... that would be great news.

No, T-Max 3200 is finer-grained than Delta 3200, by a considerable margin. I tested them a while back. The Kodak material is about ISO 800–1000, and the Ilford stuff is about ISO 1000–1250. Neopan 1600 clocked in at around ISO 650.

 

[trendland]

People didn't buy it in the quantities that Kodak wanted back when it was discontinued. If they have streamlined their manufacturing process and/or feel that there is money to be made by producing it, then why not? By the same token, there's no need for many 100, or 400ISO films either.

I really don't understand how bringing back a film and showing commitment to film can be bad in any way.

What you state has a real logic. Well - I would like to state : Every new film with good characteristis will higher the demand to other films.

with regards

PS : The oposite is also true : Every discontinued film will smaler the general demand to films (TODAY).....in the past (years behind) it was a little different - in regard of the short distance.

 

[trendland]

I don't get all this negativity and hostility. Kodak is bringing back a very nice film with great sharpnes and tonality.
This shot i took a couple of weeks ago at a jazz/blues session. The film expireded 1993 and has not been consistently cooled all the time. I exposed it as ISO 1200 and developed it as ISO 1600. My first try with this great film, and I immediately felt sad, that is was discontinued.
By now all my prayers seemed to be heard by Kodak.
I am happy!

Vocal by Michael G, on Flickr

Kind regards Michael.
Click on it and you will be taken to a higher resolution picture at Flickr.

I will come back tomorow.(bussy now)...but from the first look it seams to be not soo bad....
with regards

 

[BrianShaw]

There's no way this is old stock...no way. That would be beyond the pale.

Ya, I got corrected on that assumption on another forum thread. Sorry for the wild and erroneous speculation. I’ll not tell that story again!

 

[trendland]

Yeah - so friends this is the new Tmax3200 from Kodak .....pls. don´t state that you never will like it!!!!

BECAUSE I WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS...

More film choices the better. Now how about in 120 and

 

[trendland]

More film choices the better. Now how about in 120 and 4"x5"?[/QUOTE
Kodak reintroduced Tmax3200 to new kids on the block.And there are many out there - believe me. They take their digital cameras with ISO settings 50.000 or they are using their Iphones. Many of them ask : how to become analogue ?
(I made my point clear to this term in the other thread - by the way ) So what - Kodak gave them an answer wich may be simple to you - but in the same way it is real clever : Tmax3200 push you up to the next level of photography.
It will be now their first "analogue" film
(at around 10 - 11 bucks by the way).
And you can be sure :to most of them it'll be not their last one.
This should also answer your question to 120 film. If the sellings are as expected :
"high" and from my point there is absolutly no single doubt about - you just have to wait a while. BECAUSE THE ASSEMBLING OF 120 FILMS IS NO PROBLEM.
Ultrafast push films in 4x5 or higher are very special from my point - I can't say
with regards

 

[trendland]

I don't get all this negativity and hostility. Kodak is bringing back a very nice film with great sharpnes and tonality.
This shot i took a couple of weeks ago at a jazz/blues session. The film expireded 1993 and has not been consistently cooled all the time. I exposed it as ISO 1200 and developed it as ISO 1600. My first try with this great film, and I immediately felt sad, that is was discontinued.
By now all my prayers seemed to be heard by Kodak.
I am happy!

Vocal by Michael G, on Flickr

Kind regards Michael.
Click on it and you will be taken to a higher resolution picture at Flickr.

At E.I. ISO 1200 it looks like pushed normal Box 400 films up to ISO 800 - right ? So it is real sharp and with best tonals from my point - if the other pictures are also from Tmax3200 (looking at the highlights) one would not expect such fast film..
with regards

 

[trendland]

It's real simple. Film productions requires a vast economy of scale to make it suitably profitable for the manufacturer. Ilford is the ONE company on the planet where photographic film is their core business. Without film, Ilford does not exist. The other two companies have been very vocal and demonstrative about how film is not their core business.

While film use is growing, it is growing in very very tiny steps. We are NOT returning to the glory days when millions upon millions upon millions of people shoot film. Therefore, an increase in supply of film represents a significant dilution of the customer base. Ilford will most certainly sell less D3200, possibly a lot less. Many salivate and buying anything, absolutely anything, with a K on it. It does not matter that this resurrected film is hardly any improvement at all over Delta 3200. It just has a K on it. That's all it takes. It is very dangerous to weaken the one company who is truly dedicated enough to make film their core business.

More choice can be bad. It is certainly not automatic that it is good. That's too simplistic in thinking.

RattyMouse - pls. do me a favour and slow down.....!
I will bet that Ilford (wich I prefer also as a real nice film manufacturing company )
will sell NOT A SINGLE DELTA 3200 LESS.
YOU WILL SOON NOTICE THAT THE OPOSITE OF MORE LESS DEMAND WILL HAPPEN.
Perhaps you may call B&H in a few month and ask about demand on D3200 AND other Ilford films to prove it ?
with regards

PS : Just think about what will happen next...........

 

[trendland]

It is just finished now. ....here is a first shot of new Tmax3200. I decided on E.I.
ISO 800 because of outdoor and daylight
I had no need of highest speed at E.I.
6400/12800..first.....!
But from my point it is real smaller grained at lower E.I.'s.
(If you may see ISO 800 as "low" )

.....and from tonals - also not "bad" but from this shot not it isn't the intention on tonals.
with regards

 

[G1DRP]

I'm really looking forward to shooting a few rolls of this. Great news in my humble opinion!

 

[trendland]

Sorry - forgetting to state - the developement :
Kodak Xtol (stock) 9' 45" (20C)....with normal agitation.
Well - and I am real surpriced of cause.
(but I will not do it again with Perceptol at ISO 400........no worry about)
with regards

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Would you agree with? Is there a need of this film ? Is it better than Ilford Delta 3200 ?

with regards

The marketplace is a far better judge than the opinions of individual APUG members. This film was discontinued due to lack of interest. If you liker something then buy lots of it. In other words stimulate sales. Rule of Acquisition #47. Really at < 10,000 members APUG has little influence.

 

[Bill Burk]

That was fast trendland, you got your hands on some already?

 

[David Luttmann]

Looking forward to seeing some results at 3200 and 6400.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

The marketplace is a far better judge than the opinions of individual APUG members...

By definition, since there no longer are APUG members. APUG doesn't exist now. PHOTRIO does.