Kodak has me baffled

[gary in nj]

I purchased 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 film. When I opened the box I expected to find Tri-X 400 film (Tri-X PAN actually) but inside was 400TX. So I thought I misinterpreted the product description. So I went to the kodakalaris website to see what the correct ordering name might be. From their website:

KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 400 Film / TX 135-24 / Product Code 1590652
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY 135-24 / Product Code 8521114

OK, so they are different product codes. Then why the same product in different labeled boxes? I have both 400TX and now Tri-X products - both boxes contain the same product.

What am I missing?

 

[Sirius Glass]

TMax 400 [TMY] is a tabular grain film and has finer grain.
Tri-X 400 [TX] is a traditional grain film and has the grain and look that most people associate with film.
Pick the film you want based on the grain that you want to see.

 

[markbarendt]

I purchased 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 film. When I opened the box I expected to find Tri-X 400 film (Tri-X PAN actually) but inside was 400TX. So I thought I misinterpreted the product description. So I went to the kodakalaris website to see what the correct ordering name might be. From their website:

KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 400 Film / TX 135-24 / Product Code 1590652
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY 135-24 / Product Code 8521114

OK, so they are different product codes. Then why the same product in different labeled boxes? I have both 400TX and now Tri-X products - both boxes contain the same product.

What am I missing?

The reference to tmax is a distraction here since you ordered Tri-x and got Tri-x.

There are currently two versions of Tri-X.

The version you got 400TX is used for all roll films.

The other version is 320TXP and only available in sheet sizes, no rolls.

 

[pentaxuser]

You may not be missing anything, based on the information you have given us. The two films have different product codes and two different names which suggests to me that there are two different films. What else have you got in the information or product appearance that leads you to believe both boxes contain the same product?

I ask this question in a spirit of inquiry as there may be something else that leads you to believe both boxes contain the same product which we need to know.

I think that Sirius has assumed that the question you asked is what I have assumed you have asked also but it may be that you are querying why Tri-X is described as Tri-X but has the Kodak code of TX? I am unsure about the nub of your question?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[klownshed]

I purchased 10 rolls of Tri-X 400 film. When I opened the box I expected to find Tri-X 400 film (Tri-X PAN actually) but inside was 400TX. So I thought I misinterpreted the product description. So I went to the kodakalaris website to see what the correct ordering name might be. From their website:

KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 400 Film / TX 135-24 / Product Code 1590652
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY 135-24 / Product Code 8521114

OK, so they are different product codes. Then why the same product in different labeled boxes? I have both 400TX and now Tri-X products - both boxes contain the same product.

What am I missing?

400TX is Tri-X. It's available in 35mm and 120 and is ISO 400 rated.

TMax 400 has the code 400TMY. They're not the same codes or film as tri-x, but yeah the codes are confusing.

To make it more confusing, TRI-X is also available as a 320 speed film in sheet film only and the code for that is 320TXP.

So if you want TRI-X for 35mm or 120 you've got the right stuff. It was reformulated a few years back and is not the same as pre 2007 Tri-X.

 

[cmacd123]

When Kodak moved all production to one machine in Rochester, Tri-x pan was modified and the current product is labelled 400TX to distinguish from the older one. there is a different data sheet, and recommended development times changed at that point.

current data sheet is f-4017
http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/prod/files/files/products/f4017_TriX.pdf

the older film was in data sheet F-9 but that may be hard to find.

 

[removed account4]

hi gary

tx, tri x txp they are all pretty much the same
txp is sheets tx/tri x are rolls, one is just an old name i think.
they have nothing to do with tmy other than
the confusing name/label and asa/iso .
have fun with your tri x !

john

 

[darkroommike]

When Kodak moved all production to one machine in Rochester, Tri-x pan was modified and the current product is labelled 400TX to distinguish from the older one. there is a different data sheet, and recommended development times changed at that point.

current data sheet is f-4017
http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/prod/files/files/products/f4017_TriX.pdf

the older film was in data sheet F-9 but that may be hard to find.

http://125px.com/docs/film/kodak/f9-Tri-X_Pan.pdf

 

[darkroommike]

TX and old school Tri-X are very similar in that they both have a pretty strong shoulder. TXP 320 has a much straighter characteristic curve much beloved by Adams, Picker, and Sexton though I understand Sexton now uses TMax for a lot of his work. And TXP, which used to be available in 120 as well as sheets has a retouching surface on both sides. You think it's confusing now, both TX and TXP used to be available in 120, at the same time. TXP was only available in Pro-Paks so that helped (a little). I loved TXP120.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

As a general comment, I mentioned on another thread it is very confusing to lump all the films; Tri-X, Tri-X Professional. 400TX and 320TXP together with the name Tri-X. The ones marked 400TX and 320TXP are newer emulsions and have been available for over a decade. A decade! More than enough time to get used to things. Whether you mean the old emulsions or the new it does make an important difference in how questions are answered.

 

[MattKing]

I just can't resist:
You haven't bought Tri-X for more than ten years, and didn't notice the change?!!!

 

[John Wiegerink]

I just can't resist:
You haven't bought Tri-X for more than ten years, and didn't notice the change?!!!

Who is that mask man with the silver bullet?

 

[mshchem]

The modern version of Tri-X is got about as much grain as Panatomic-X did in the 70's. I hated grain then, now I kinda miss it.
Mike

 

[Agulliver]

I am confused by the OP. 400TX is Tri-X.

400TMY is T-MAX

Two different films. But you appear to have got what you wanted in the box, which is TX, not TMY.

 

[Harry Stevens]

TX is the giveaway just like TM is .............

 

[gary in nj]

So I haven't had 10 years to adjust to any changes as I just recently got back into film photography after a 30 year layoff. Here is what confused me; back in the analog days I used Tri-X Pan. Twice now I have purchased film (10 rolls) where I saw a box that said "Tri-X" on the box and I expected to receive Tri-X Pan, but got 400TX. I thought that 400TX was/is a TMAX film. Like I said, I was confused...and wrong.

So I have been processing my 400TX as 400TMY, developing my film in D-76 1:1 for 12:30 instead of the suggested 9:45. To be honest, I think the negatives look good with a little extra time. I may have accidentally learned something.

 

[klownshed]

I thought that 400TX was/is a TMAX film.

It is confusing labelling.

And the development time difference is less than 30% extra, which isn't really too significant. ;-)

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I was never confused by TMAX. It is fine grain film. But TRI-X talk on the internet is confusing with only something labeled as 400TX available for purchase with grain and rendering not so close to original TRI-X.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Tri-X Pan 320 is an ISO 320 and is labeled 320TXP. See: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/prod/files/files/resources/f4017_TriX.pdf It is a sheet film. It was discontinued a few years ago in 120. I do not know its history for 135.

 

[NB23]

The most half-assed product codes on the planet. I stopped bothering when I realized it was probably a bad joke.
Old tri-x and new tri-x with same codes but inverted letters. Or the word "professional" in front or behind indicates new or old.
Wait for the developing times they give... you won't believe it.

 

[removed account4]

Wait for the developing times they give... you won't believe it.

i ignore all their development times

i do is 1 of 5 things
ansco 130 or dektol 1: 6ish @ 8 1/2 mins ( sheets ) 7mins rolls
caffenol c ( free poured/not measured with a splash of ansco 130 or dektol stock in it ) either agitate normally ( or constant shuflling of sheets ) 8 1/2 mins
or stand developed @ 30-40 mins agitating the last minute continuously,
or both previously named developers
4 mins ( dektol/a130 agitate normally 1min/10sec.min ) then the caffenol spiked with it in there continuous agitated both rolls and sheets for 4 mins.

film comes out great no matter the iso, no matter the label professional, txp, tx 320 400 doesnt' matter.

 

[John Galt]

aaaaand . . . now I'm even more confused.

I loved the old (1960s-1970s) Tri-X 400, Kodak is starting to piss me off.

What do I buy today that is the equivalent?? I frikkin' swear . . I am "THIS CLOSE" to switching to Ilford.

 

[markbarendt]

aaaaand . . . now I'm even more confused.

I loved the old (1960s-1970s) Tri-X 400, Kodak is starting to piss me off.

What do I buy today that is the equivalent?? I frikkin' swear . . I am "THIS CLOSE" to switching to Ilford.

I'm guessing you are joking.

 

[John Galt]

"I'm guessing you are joking."

no Mark, I am serious as a f**king heart attack.

I am returning to analog photography after my recent retirement . . . a 40+ year hiatus. My question is and remains Valid.

 

[MattKing]

The Kodak films are way better now than 1960-1970s Tri-X.
Finer grain, better highlight retention, excellent speed in a wider variety of developers.
You will have to go to another manufacturer if you want to go back a half century or so. I doubt you will find that in anything as modern as the Ilford products.