Kodak Plus X- How I Miss This Film

[GregY]

Just to point out, pre-digital era film was being consumed not by photographers but really by people taking snapshots on point and shoots and disposables. Fill will never be in every home again and that's not the goal of the film community. Cameras will never again be in every home either. The day of the camera and film has passed, the same can be said for many things like personal computers and landlines. That doesn't mean there is room for growth and improvement. People still paint with brushes and write with pens. People still ride motorcycles and manual vehicles. Horses are still ridden for fun and still have a use for work. Film will join the ranks of tools once used by all but now have a specific use.

I think Plus-X may come back because it fills in a gap in Kodaks line. Unless they start marketing Double X to fill that gap which is fine by me too.

" pre-digital era film was being consumed not by photographers"
You left out every photojournalist, magazine & newspaper photographer.....

 

[Cholentpot]

" pre-digital era film was being consumed not by photographers"
You left out every photojournalist, magazine & newspaper photographer.....

Lets take the USA as an example.

In 2000 there were approximately 1500 newspapers and approximately 5000 magazines. While I'm sure these publications went through massive amount of film it pales in comparison to 300+ million people buying and using film. The amount of film that people went through is mind boggling. And how that came to an end is fascinating too. Imagine the smartphone going obsolete next year. Entire industries will be gone. And we don't even buy those things weekly or daily.

Think of something we buy constantly. Gasoline. Imagine that in 2024 a perfect alternative to gas was introduced. Cheap, available and did exactly what gas does only better and cheaper. The cars worked the same but didn't need stations, and didn't need traditional maintenance. Tires also didn't need to be changed, in fact the idea of cars basically disappeared except for very specific needs. What would the landscape look like? Everyone would still have a from of private transportation but the motor car and everything associated with it would be gone. Car washes, dealerships, infrastructure. Poof. And nothing needed to be built to replace that whole industry.

 

[warden]

I dont find FP4+ looks anything like it.

Have you tried comparing it to Delta 400 instead? The characteristic curves line up nicely, although the speed and grain are different of course.

 

[GregY]

It would be interesting to see the statistics from the era. How much film was used by amateurs?....& how many families used the same roll of film for all the birthdays and holidays for a year? I think you figures (1500 newspapers) are very USA centric.... compared to this # of newspapers....
"The data on books published displayed on the Worldometer's counter is based on statistics elaborated by WAN, the Paris based World Association of Newspapers, which represents 18,000 newspapers; its membership includes 76 national newspaper associations, newspaper companies and individual newspaper executives in 102 ..."

& you haven't accounted for the use of film in the movie industry....which was significant.

 

[GregY]

Have you tried comparing it to Delta 400 instead? The characteristic curves line up nicely, although the speed and grain are different of course.

not only speed & grain, but also perhaps more importantly in printing ....tonality. To echo the former post... "show me the print"...means more to me than any curves comparison

 

[warden]

not only speed & grain, but also perhaps more importantly in printing ....tonality. To echo the former post... "show me the print"...means more to me than any curves comparison

Yes the curve is just one type of data available of course. Printing is key, but if I was starting down the path of trying to achieve the Plus-X look in the darkroom I wouldn't start with FP4 because of the differences in the curves alone. You have to start somewhere after all and I'd start with a little help from the curves. ymmv as they say.

 

[Cholentpot]

It would be interesting to see the statistics from the era. How much film was used by amateurs?....& how many families used the same roll of film for all the birthdays and holidays for a year? I think you figures (1500 newspapers) are very USA centric.... compared to this # of newspapers....
"The data on books published displayed on the Worldometer's counter is based on statistics elaborated by WAN, the Paris based World Association of Newspapers, which represents 18,000 newspapers; its membership includes 76 national newspaper associations, newspaper companies and individual newspaper executives in 102 ..."

& you haven't accounted for the use of film in the movie industry....which was significant.

I did mention that it was USA centric.

Again, the movie film industry is huge. So huge that it's what's keeping film alive right now. However, amateurs were the heart and soul of film sales. How much film did Walgreens, Revco, Boots, Walmart, Kmart, Sears and everyone else sell and process? The minilab in my local place ran 24/7/365 it never stopped.

 

[GregY]

I did mention that it was USA centric.

Again, the movie film industry is huge. So huge that it's what's keeping film alive right now. However, amateurs were the heart and soul of film sales. How much film did Walgreens, Revco, Boots, Walmart, Kmart, Sears and everyone else sell and process? The minilab in my local place ran 24/7/365 it never stopped.

My apologies...yes you did say USA.
I still hold faint hope of seeing Kodak reissue any old films.....

 

[Cholentpot]

My apologies...yes you did say USA.
I still hold faint hope of seeing Kodak reissue any old films.....

They brought back Ektachrome, I think they have it in them to do a black and white.

 

[warden]

They brought back Ektachrome, I think they have it in them to do a black and white.

I'm still amazed they did that gutsy move. If P3200 and Ekatchrome are selling well I would think they'd keep filling out the line too.

 

[MCB18]

Does this stuff age well? Because I have a box of about 10 sheets of 3x4, and I have no idea what to do with.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Due to its considerable development versatility, TMax was the silver bullet intended to kill off once for all several popular films, including Pan X, Plus X, Super-XX, and Tri-X. But old dogs don't like learning new tricks, and some had a sentimental attachment to the shotgun grain of good ole Triassic-X, so that's the one dinosaur which barely survived the mass extinction event. There's no reason for the others to come back.

Now, as per Delta 100, yeah, it is the closest in toe shape to Plus X Pan; but if you overdevelop it much at all to increase the highlight separation, the whole curve tends to go steeper and get contrasty. But since it is
available, and Plus X isn't, might as well learn a new trick and at least try it.

"Show me the print"?? I could show you five different prints made from five different films, and probably not one of you could tell me which was made from which. Yes, films differ quite a bit in certain characteristics; but there are also quite a number of film development and printing options which make the situation quite malleable. I explored Delta 100 as a possible replacement for TMax 100 if that ever got scarce. I distinctly prefer TMax; but if it dried up, I know how to force D100 into the same pair of shoes. But if I were trying to mimic Plus X instead, using D100, I'd be developing it in a whole different manner than like for pseudo-TMX.

 

[Cholentpot]

Due to its considerable development versatility, TMax was the silver bullet intended to kill off once for all several popular films, including Pan X, Plus X, Super-XX, and Tri-X. But old dogs don't like learning new tricks, and some had a sentimental attachment to the shotgun grain of good ole Triassic-X, so that's the one dinosaur which barely survived the mass extinction event. There's no reason for the others to come back.

Now, as per Delta 100, yeah, it is the closest in toe shape to Plus X Pan; but if you overdevelop it much at all to increase the highlight separation, the whole curve tends to go steeper and get contrasty. But since it is
available, and Plus X isn't, might as well learn a new trick and at least try it.

"Show me the print"?? I could show you five different prints made from five different films, and probably not one of you could tell me which was made from which. Yes, films differ quite a bit in certain characteristics; but there are also quite a number of film development and printing options which make the situation quite malleable. I explored Delta 100 as a possible replacement for TMax 100 if that ever got scarce. I distinctly prefer TMax; but if it dried up, I know how to force D100 into the same pair of shoes. But if I were trying to mimic Plus X instead, using D100, I'd be developing it in a whole different manner than like for pseudo-TMX.

I mean when we get down to it isn't film all about sentimental attachment these days?

 

[DREW WILEY]

I don't mind being sentimental about film. But I use it because it still delivers the highest quality results and can be optically printed. Whatcha gonna do - spend as much on a MF digital back as on a car, just to hope to mimic 645 results at best? And then the darn thing will be software-obsolete five years later. And then you'll really get nostalgic about film.

 

[GregY]

It's interesting how you don't miss something until it is gone. I never used much PlusX....,only in the last 5 yrs have i really appreciated Agfapan 25.
As for the D50 ... digital is another universe away.

 

[takilmaboxer]

When Plus-X was on its way out, I bought a roll of PX and a roll of FP4 and ran them through two identical folding cameras, taking images simultaneously of the same subject. I already knew what development times to use to achieve the same contrast gradient. I printed them optically on Ilford RC paper, on a 45MCRX, carefully adjusting the prints for identical middle greys. When placed side by side neither I nor any of my friends could identify which print came from which film.
Then I repeated the experiment with PX and Tmax 100, and the difference was obvious. No way TM100 is a substitute for PX! But FP4 works fine for me. Your opinion may vary, but if they made PX again, I'd buy it.

 

[warden]

I don't mind being sentimental about film. But I use it because it still delivers the highest quality results and can be optically printed. Whatcha gonna do - spend as much on a MF digital back as on a car, just to hope to mimic 645 results at best? And then the darn thing will be software-obsolete five years later. And then you'll really get nostalgic about film.

Inviting digital into the conversation on a 100% analog thread? Tisk tisk.

 

[DREW WILEY]

It doesn't matter what you or I think. The Management of Kodak already did the decision making decades ago, and sent Plus-X to the guillotine because THEY thought they had a realistic replacement. I do know how to bend TMax that direction, but also know that Delta 100 would be a closer fit. And I already indicated how an upsweeping sag can be induced in the FP4 curve. So much about portraiture has changed anyway. It ain't all about high-key shots of Caucasian brides in white dresses anymore.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I mean when we get down to it isn't film all about sentimental attachment these days?

The same can be said about our cameras...

 

[Rick A]

The same can be said about our cameras...

There's only one camera I'm sentimental over, and I traded it away many years ago for a motorcycle. My first 35mm SLR, and I immediately replaced it with a much better camera. I miss the motorbike more than I miss the camera, and I miss my friend that I did the deal with more than that..

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

There's only one camera I'm sentimental over, and I traded it away many years ago for a motorcycle. My first 35mm SLR, and I immediately replaced it with a much better camera. I miss the motorbike more than I miss the camera, and I miss my friend that I did the deal with more than that..

 

[Tonglen]

I processed two rolls of Plus-X Pan Pro 120 in Perceptol 1:2 the past couple days.
These were rolls from maybe 18 years ago that I had never got around to developing.
They seemed to turn out OK. One roll of 120 left and a fair amount of 135.

 

[Minox]

Shot Plus-X for a year or so, in the mid-90's, with mixed results. For some reason, I was never that proficient or knowledgeable to get the best from that film at the time, unfortunately. I remember it was easy just to step in any Jessops shop and buy a couple of rolls.

I changed over to Tmax and Tri-X for sharpness reasons. I do remember however the Plus-X being very latitude friendly and having some beautiful velvet tones. I am certain the film had lots to offer, but it was me who wasn't up for the job

 

[Agulliver]

The camera I was most sentimental over was stolen just over two years ago. I am *very* non-violent but the toe-rag who stole that had better watch out if they ever show themselves to me. It's impossible to replace the camera my late father bought and modified, and taught photography to me on.

But using cameras and films is more than sentiment. Sure, I am a sentimental soul but there's also a desire to create images with certain characteristics. If I didn't specifically like what happens when I use Camera X with film Y, I'd just shoot digital all the time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Plus X I have is being saved for portraits.