Kodak XTOL trade concern announcment

[mshchem]

ADOX Fotoimpex is donating their time to help us, so how about stopping posting wild speculation and conspiracy theories and letting ADOX spend their time supporting us.

My version of "wild conspiracy theories" doesn't involve photography

 

[MattKing]

Point I'm trying to make is, if Arista can produce quality products

Interesting slip

 

[mshchem]

Interesting slip

I don't get it. Unless they are making the liquid chemistry, for Alaris. I can't believe these guys made brown Dektol?????? I haven't bought any powders from Alaris since the Tetenal receivership (you would know the right term) .

Here's a idea, if Adox is listening, ship everything in Jobo bottles, those babies are over 10 bucks a piece

I'm ready for Covid, so I'm ready for this to get sorted. One obvious supplier that seems to avoid any problems resides in Mobberly, England they are complete from "soup to nuts"

Trying not to offend, Best Regards Mike

 

[MattKing]

Arista is Freestyle's house brand.
Sino Promise Group bought Kodak Alaris' photo chemical business.

 

[wyofilm]

Tetanal, Adox, Ilford, Photographer's Formulary, Bostick & Sullivan (a stretch), Arista (I think) and whoever else I am missing are all supplier/manufacturers that provide alternatives to Kodak/Kodak Alaris/Sino Promise that meet my needs. I bought a crappy batch of xtol (first purchase of xtol ever) and while I don't regret it, I am also over the mystique of Kodak and whatever spawned from them (mind you I was Rochester kid for awhile during Kodak's heyday). Today Kodak still makes wonderful films and I hope they continue to do that and I might give their color papers a try (how about cut sheets). In the end Kodak, KA, and Sino Promises aren't companies focused on traditional photography. I included Sino Promises in that list, but I haven't a clue what they do - though from their website they look like just another middle-man company.

 

[mshchem]

Arista is Freestyle's house brand.
Sino Promise Group bought Kodak Alaris' photo chemical business.

Matt as you know I'm a little slow. I think it's my looming 65th birthday in 11 months and way too much CP-5 Formalin fixer in my formative years. Playing with Mercury from old thermostats probably didn't help

 

[AgX]

ADOX Fotoimpex is donating their time to help us, so how about stopping posting wild speculation and conspiracy theories and letting ADOX spend their time supporting us.

As with your quoting you have hinted at a post of mine, please tell in what way by wild speculation did I hamper the work of Adox?
Or with other words, keep to the facts!

 

[wyofilm]

Warning: I'm going off-topic (or even more of topic). The Aldrich Chemical Company was founded by Austrian Jewish refugee name Alfred Bader. It started as nothing - a one sheet catalog out of a garage from a man who basically had nothing. What Aldrich was was a company that made fine chemicals for chemists. They were great. There catalogue was as good as any other organic chemistry resource. Chemists, when they weren't using the catalog to order chemicals, constantly referred to it for the thoughtful layout of compounds including useful physical constants. Every chemist I knew had a catalog at hand, just for the reference material. Two other things were important about the catalog: the cover always featured a painting from Dutch mater painters and the tagline, "Please Bother Us!" The painting cover was because Bader sidelined as a art historian, but the tagline Please Bother Us, was because he was a chemist's chemist. He knew what chemist's wanted and how to talk to chemists because he was chemist first. When he stepped down in 1991 he left a giant company (Sigma-Aldrich), but it was never the same because it was run by suits. Oh, the company today is huge and does wiz-bang business that I used when I was running a university research laboratory, but it isn't a company to be loyal to. Kodak/Kodak Alaris/Sino Promises stopped being the Aldrich Chemical Company a long time ago.

 

[MattKing]

I included Sino Promises in that list, but I haven't a clue what they do

They were the world's largest distributor of the Kodak colour processing chemicals and papers, and now also own the business that produces or contracts for production of those chemicals and papers, along with the business that contracts for the production of the black and white chemicals.
They also are a very large distributor of Epson products.

 

[mshchem]

Oh and to prove again how slow I am, it wasn't a slip. Arista and Freestyle supply all the local community colleges and high schools with the eco-pro XTOL substitute, L-76, all the cheaper versions of the brand name. This latest screw up by KA is a opening. As I see it two players, Ilford, and, Freestyle's chemistry and paper group, F&S distribution or something of that nature. I'm going back to Ebay it's more fun.

 

[MattKing]

Arista is a brand name owned by Freestyle - nothing more.
Just like Kodak is a brand name owned by Sino Promise, at least with respect to the business they just bought.
There is a good chance that Freestyle is contracting with some of the same manufacturers - at least with respect to the new US made versions of the Kodak branded photo-chemicals.
Sino Promise has a much more robust international distribution system than Freestyle, which has difficulty competing internationally.
EDIT: which would have difficulty competing internationally, due to its size and lack of a significant international infrastructure.

 

[wyofilm]

There is a good chance that Freestyle is contracting with some of the same manufacturers - at least with respect to the new US made versions of the Kodak branded photo-chemicals.

Interesting point. I would rather fatten the wallet of Freestyle instead of a Hong Kong firm - all else being equal. Otherwise, I'm just paying for a Kodak label.

Kodak: contracted chemical manufacturer --> Sino Promise --> B&H --> me.
Freestyle/Arista: contracted chemical manufacturer --> Freestyle --> me

I like equation 2 better.

 

[MattKing]

Interesting point. I would rather fatten the wallet of Freestyle instead of a Hong Kong firm - all else being equal. Otherwise, I'm just paying for a Kodak label.

Kodak: contracted chemical manufacturer --> Sino Promise --> B&H --> me.
Freestyle/Arista: contracted chemical manufacturer --> Freestyle --> me

I like equation 2 better.

And of course for the rest of the world, buying from Freestyle is expensive, due to international shipping, whereas buying from our local store that buys from the distributor that they use can be cheaper.

 

[wyofilm]

And of course for the rest of the world, buying from Freestyle is expensive, due to international shipping, whereas buying from our local store that buys from the distributor that they use can be cheaper.

Two things: First, the rest of the world doesn't need to buy Freestyle. Europe can buy Ilford, Adox, Tetanal, Moersch, et al. Second, I would hate to see a single seller of chemicals; it is too easy to wipe out an industry when all is placed in a single basket. Bonus, Kodak branded photo-chem offerings for color is strong but fairly weak in the B&W arena compared to those offered by its competitors. I can't think of a single compelling reason why one would want to buy Kodak branded b/w chemicals.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

The pricing and range of those Freestyle products looks very appealing from a UK perspective.

 

[relistan]

I have not tried it yet, but some of you may be interested in @albada 's Mocon developer, which is a concentrate that behaves much like XTOL: https://www.photrio.com/forum/resources/mocon-xtol-quality-in-a-long-lasting-concentrate.219/

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've just replied this lunchtime to Kodak / Alaris / Sino Promise, so will report back with developments.

 

[pentaxuser]

@ADOX Fotoimpex thank you! I hope you are seriously considering the replenishment as a major Xtol feature and will be publishing recommended replenishment amounts/process for home users. Unfortunately, existing Xtol clones do not even mention replenishment that's why I can't use them. Thanks again.

I feel that if Adox can produce an Xtol clone that has none of the recent problems of Xtol and can produce their equivalent to effectively fit the space of Xtol in terms of replenishment with a 1L pack etc then it is onto a winner.

All but the Kodak diehards are likely to switch and indeed because, as has been said, Xtol is Kodak only in name then there may be no residual loyalty anyway.

If SinoPromise ensures that this latest Xtol problem is the very last Xtol problem it might have a fighting chance at best but if Adox can genuinely tweak its product to gain the edge such as 1L packs plus replenishment info, then I fear that Xtol sales can only go one way and its down

pentaxuser

 

[Donald Qualls]

I feel that if Adox can produce an Xtol clone that has none of the recent problems of Xtol and can produce their equivalent to effectively fit the space of Xtol in terms of replenishment with a 1L pack etc then it is onto a winner.

I would note that 1L packets are on the small side for practical replenishment -- though I suppose you could mix one for working solution and a second for replenisher (my working solution is 2L, however, because my sheet film tank takes about 1.6L for 4x5 film). Still, not a bad idea to sell both 1L and 5L size, so folks who use it slower don't have to be as concerned about the stock solution going off.

 

[wyofilm]

> I can't think of a single compelling reason why one would want to buy Kodak branded b/w chemicals.

Using developer as its own replenisher. The combination of convenience, quality and economy of Xtol-R system should not be underestimated.

Otherwise I'd be buying Ultrafine-branded D76 at $5.49 per gallon. The quality is amazing, there are recipes for every film and final look imaginable, etc.

Reliability is in question as is the reliability of availability (though I put this one down to 2020 disruptions). I am not an X-tol user, but I recall a thread on Photrio where several people reported using an Xtol clone in a replenishment manner. I believe it was also reported that they saw identical results.

Here is one of the threads:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-eco-pro-legacypro.176911/page-2#post-2306127

 

[wyofilm]

If SinoPromise ensures that this latest Xtol problem is the very last Xtol problem

Therein lies part of the problem. Sino and formally KA are middle men. If I understand the relationship its EK that outsources photochemical production and KA/Sino who distributes it. Of course this isn't to say that going forward Sino won't be chatting with EK regularly, but really what can they do to ensure product quality? Iford, Adox, Freestyle, etc are all directly responsible or their products.

 

[lantau]

I would note that 1L packets are on the small side for practical replenishment -- though I suppose you could mix one for working solution and a second for replenisher (my working solution is 2L, however, because my sheet film tank takes about 1.6L for 4x5 film). Still, not a bad idea to sell both 1L and 5L size, so folks who use it slower don't have to be as concerned about the stock solution going off.

Yes, it is quite amazing that you can replenish with only a 2L volume. After all replenishment was designed for larger tanks in commercial labs. For my neutral fixer I've just began a replenishment scheme with only a 1L volume, but fixer is a process that goes to completion. I already replenished half the volume in a weekend by finally developing all the b/w film I shot as far back as August.

Developers, OTOH, are precision tools and the engineers will have assumed a minimum tanks size when tuning the replenishment volume to get to the right balance of developer and byproducts that will eventually establish itself. Too small a tank and you should get a different ratio with the given replenishment rate. Luckily overreplenished and, and for b/w that is okay. You'll simply adjust the times until the negatives come out as desired.

For C41 and its fixed process parameters it's not that easy. I hope my 5L are good enough. In a Fuji document there is a chart regarding tank volume, number of films per week and which of their replenishment systems should be used. Their minimum tank size is 10L. Only twice my tank size and hence my hope that the balance will ok. Oxidation may be a reason for the smallest tank size in a minilab and should be less of a problem for me because a minilab tank, even with floating lid, will be much worse at storing solutions than my 5L PET bottles and Butane cover. Same for my Xtol.

Back to the topic:

I've been using a 5L bottle of Xtol and developed close to 20 rolls in it over the last few months. Remember that you can develop up to 5 rolls in 1L without time adjustment. The limit for a 5L batch is 25, then. Using the times for stock Xtol all films looked good.

I began replenishing now from aother 5L batch. I threw away the outer packaging of the 2nd batch just days before I heard about this new problem. For that reason I have no idea if my Xtol has of the problematic dates. I bought both bags in February from Maco direct. Probably because Foto Impex didn't have it in stock, or something else I needed at the time. Maybe I should run a test roll in 250mL of the replenisher before going on further.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hopefully you're sitting down -- I've also been (successfully, so far) replenishing a 1 liter bottle of Flexicolor Color Developer -- after a dozen rolls over a couple months, it seems fine. I think both C-41 and B&W developers are much more tolerant than you claim -- at least if you're looking at them, rather than subjecting them to forensic levels of scrutiny.

 

[MattKing]

If I understand the relationship its EK that outsources photochemical production and KA/Sino who distributes it.

Eastman Kodak has no role in the production or marketing of photo chemistry. That business was entirely divested - first when Eastman Chemical was spun off, and then, as a part of the bankruptcy settlement, the marketing and colour chemical production (and colour paper production) were divested to the Kodak Limited pension plan, which incorporated Kodak Alaris to hold and run those businesses. Kodak Alaris just recently sold the Kodak branded photo chemicals business and the colour paper business to Sino Promise Group.
When those divestments happened, most of the employees went with them.
There remains strong connections between all the entities - you don't survive as a manufacturer of film unless the entity that markets your film is on the same page with you. The same applies to the colour chemicals and colour paper (and to a lesser extent, the black and white films and paper) - a film manufacturer needs to work and communicate with the manufacturers of the chemicals and papers, because the film won't work unless the chemicals (and for some the paper) will work with them.
There are a very large number of people who work worldwide bringing Kodak branded materials to end users. There is just as much a reason to remain brand loyal to them as to any other brand that has a worldwide presence.
Do you avoid Ilford branded chemicals because they are owned by a holding company and don't manufacture anything themselves?

 

[lantau]

Hopefully you're sitting down -- I've also been (successfully, so far) replenishing a 1 liter bottle of Flexicolor Color Developer -- after a dozen rolls over a couple months, it seems fine. I think both C-41 and B&W developers are much more tolerant than you claim -- at least if you're looking at them, rather than subjecting them to forensic levels of scrutiny.

Wow, not bad! Are you wet printing colour negs?