New film - Rollei RPX 25

[Aurelien]

In a bad mood again?

NOt at all, I am only realistic.

 

[urbatschek]

Can you please tell me what does Adox manufacture? We have not a clue of that ... not any ... Adox is also rebranding , no more.

Ah, maybe he ate a bad duck

da Niedabaya

 

[Regular Rod]

Can you please tell me what does Adox manufacture? We have not a clue of that ... not any ... Adox is also rebranding , no more.

Err....

CMS 20?

RR

 

[AgX]

Can you please tell me what does Adox manufacture? We have not a clue of that ... not any ... Adox is also rebranding , no more.

Well, Adox ordered toll manufacturing in the past. (As Maco did too, so even they were not simply re-branding.)
In that toll-manufacturing they seem to have been involved more than just giving rough orders.

Adox have been building up their machinery. So far, if ever, they are not able to do production coating.
But amongst other steps they have started converting and packaging to my understanding.

And on that volume of production a packaging machine (not to speak of manual box-folding and filling) would be a cost factor, that would to have put in relation to the benefit for the buyers.


As you see I weigh my wording.

But if you are wiser, please do not leave us clueless.

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

Adox has started to produce their very own line of films recently. In former times they also repackaged, but for quite some time they have developed into a serious manufacturer of both films (Silvermax, new ADOX 100) and papers.

 

[MattKing]

Roger, I'm sure there is the "TX" somewhere of the Propack box that you can cut out and use as a reminder.

The flap on the pro-packs has most of the same information as the box ends and is sized to fit exactly in the holder on the back of the 120 film holders and on the back of many cameras - just tear it off

 

[Roger Cole]

Aint this why they make memory card wallets

Humm, good idea!

 

[Roger Cole]

The flap on the pro-packs has most of the same information as the box ends and is sized to fit exactly in the holder on the back of the 120 film holders and on the back of many cameras - just tear it off

I didn't realize that and that's great when I buy a whole Pro Pack, which I just did and sometimes do. But sometimes I buy unboxed rolls from the dealers too. Usually ones that I have also bought packs of, so I'll do that, and put them in a memory card wallet!

 

[MattKing]

I didn't realize that and that's great when I buy a whole Pro Pack, which I just did and sometimes do. But sometimes I buy unboxed rolls from the dealers too. Usually ones that I have also bought packs of, so I'll do that, and put them in a memory card wallet!

I've often wondered about laminating a couple of the box ends/flaps to make them more durable.

 

[jim appleyard]

Well for one thing, my Mamiya 645 backs have holders for the box ends as film reminders, much as many 35mm cameras do. Kodak's move to only selling Tri-X in ProPacks means I don't have the "TX" box tops to put in those reminder holders. Same for Portra and Ektar. I do have them for Ilford films and even my stash of IR820 Efke.

Masking tape and a black sharpie marking the letters, "TX", always worked for me!

 

[timor]

Masking tape and a black sharpie marking the letters, "TX", always worked for me!

With enough masking tape to make notes regarding let say development.

 

[MDR]

Whenever Rollei/Maco brings out a new film people badmouth the company and praise Adox. Adox has made some great products and so has Maco their lith line was one of the best products on the Market, Rollei/Maco offers one of the best liquid emulsion systems yet nobody seems to care about their good products. They might not manufacture the products but they make it available to the average joe and that ought to be honoured. Maco was a bit creative in their marketing so was Adox. I for one am happy that we those two companies.

 

[Aurelien]

Whenever Rollei/Maco brings out a new film people badmouth the company and praise Adox. Adox has made some great products and so has Maco their lith line was one of the best products on the Market, Rollei/Maco offers one of the best liquid emulsion systems yet nobody seems to care about their good products. They might not manufacture the products but they make it available to the average joe and that ought to be honoured. Maco was a bit creative in their marketing so was Adox. I for one am happy that we those two companies.

This is what I like to read

 

[JW PHOTO]

Whenever Rollei/Maco brings out a new film people badmouth the company and praise Adox. Adox has made some great products and so has Maco their lith line was one of the best products on the Market, Rollei/Maco offers one of the best liquid emulsion systems yet nobody seems to care about their good products. They might not manufacture the products but they make it available to the average joe and that ought to be honoured. Maco was a bit creative in their marketing so was Adox. I for one am happy that we those two companies.

Oh, I totally agree with you and will heap praise when it is deserved, but I also know the difference between oats before they enter the horse and oats after they leave the horse. Not all oats are the same no matter what some folks might want to sell you. I prefer to buy the preconditioned oats myself. I hope this film is the best thing since sliced bread and if it is I'll buy a whole loaf. Just my opinion of course! JohnW

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I just wonder why it is always so hard to get definitive, direct statements and proof on so many of these if they are truly new emulsions or not. Always seems to be hemming and hawing when those in the know are asked. Why can't someone directly say: "This is a completely new emulsion, made from scratch. We made it. It's NOT just some repackaging of other film."

Without that I always suspect it just another film being renamed and repackaged under some other name.

 

[Pioneer]

I just wonder why it is always so hard to get definitive, direct statements and proof on so many of these if they are truly new emulsions or not. Always seems to be hemming and hawing when those in the know are asked. Why can't someone directly say: "This is a completely new emulsion, made from scratch. We made it. It's NOT just some repackaging of other film."

Without that I always suspect it just another film being renamed and repackaged under some other name.

Why should that be a problem?

 

[pentaxuser]

Why should that be a problem?

On the same basis that the human race values transparency and being honest?

pentaxuser

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

I just wonder why it is always so hard to get definitive, direct statements and proof on so many of these if they are truly new emulsions or not. Always seems to be hemming and hawing when those in the know are asked. Why can't someone directly say: "This is a completely new emulsion, made from scratch. We made it. It's NOT just some repackaging of other film."

Without that I always suspect it just another film being renamed and repackaged under some other name.

+1

 

[grommi]

I just wonder why it is always so hard to get definitive, direct statements and proof on so many of these if they are truly new emulsions or not. Always seems to be hemming and hawing when those in the know are asked. Why can't someone directly say: "This is a completely new emulsion, made from scratch. We made it. It's NOT just some repackaging of other film."

Without that I always suspect it just another film being renamed and repackaged under some other name.

If Ilford is involved as with the other RPXes, they are not allowed by contract to talk about any production detail. The same should be for other manufacturers and retailers. Only exeption I know is Agfa Belgium, they can't "cannibalize" (hope that's understandable) their own products because there are none made for consumers. And still Maco makes a secret about which emulsion in detail is in the package, see RR400s, 400ir, superpan200, universal200 and so on and so on, they most probably are all the same.

 

[Regular Rod]

I've ordered some from Maco and will report back when I've used it. I just hope that someone soon gets some slow panchromatic film out in sheet sizes, 4x5 and 8x10 at least...

RR

 

[StoneNYC]

From Stones remark about Harman film production above, I think he is missing the point somewhat. If one of their products sales was going downhill for some reason, I strongly suspect that they would be very agile about finding out why and then fixing the problem or developing the product further. They are not a massive, sleepy company with some cobwebs over a pile of film they have in a shed

Yes I agree, of course ilford would do whatever they could to keep the product around, however if the product just doesn't sell it doesn't sell, and there's nothing they can do about it and they have to pull it, they just recently pulled a type of print paper, I don't know what type but they pulled it and explained that the sales have dropped below an amount that they could reasonably produce it and so they had to pull it and apologize of course, but reassured people that they would still produce many many amazing papers and film for a very long time as long as it was sustainable.

 

[TheToadMen]

Do you prefer the cigar style box: Dead Link Removed

What benefits do you get from such a packaging?

WOW!
A free pinhole camera with your film!!

 

[MartinP]

Yes I agree, of course ilford would do whatever they could to keep the product around, however if the product just doesn't sell it doesn't sell, and there's nothing they can do about it and they have to pull it, they just recently pulled a type of print paper, I don't know what type but they pulled it and explained that the sales have dropped below an amount that they could reasonably produce it and so they had to pull it and apologize of course, but reassured people that they would still produce many many amazing papers and film for a very long time as long as it was sustainable.

Firstly, your comment is vague and imprecise. When anyone does go looking for information, or browse through this thread by chance, your post falls in the "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" category. Widely used by marketing departments in order to damage sales of competitors products -- many people find this sort of meaningless comment to be mildly offensive in a knowledge based forum.

Secondly, "Ilford" were a company which has gone bankrupt in the last couple of months and was based in Switzerland. They have no connection to Kentmere photographic products.

Thirdly, the fact which you carefully left out of your post, whether through accident or design, are that in July this year Harman announced that the coating volume of Kentmere Fineprint VC was below economic levels and the material was not going to survive. There was the possibility of one more run if the demand was there. Minimal fact-checking by you would have led to the APUG thread (there was a url link here which no longer exists).

Fourthly, Harman have always said that they will do their utmost not to cancel an IlfordPhoto product. The Kentmere papers are legacies of the well respected range of products from a competitor of Harman, which they bought when its own parent group decided to concentrate on their main packaging-materials business, back in 2007. The coating of the materials was moved to Mobberley and most of the products continued, with gradual changes as the brand was used to assist Harman in covering different parts of the overall photographic market.

Fifthly, for some reason you did not mention the replacement cold-tone product from Harman, ANNOUNCED recently, which looks like a large improvement on the discontinued material and most likely played a part in the discontinuation of the older Kentmere product. There is also a rather large thread (there was a url link here which no longer exists) on APUG about the range of improved papers Harman have just introduced.

Sixthly, regarding contract-produced products in general, it is completely normal for the parties to a production contract to be covered by non-disclosure agreements. This works throughout industry and not just in the photographic world. In some cases just one side of the contract wants the clause, in other cases both parties do - the reasons are often lost in the depths of a marketing or legal department somewhere. Assuming that suppliers of photographic materials are constructing some especially awful conspiracy might be considered somewhat irrational.

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

You should be at least precise when criticising others, MartinP: Ilford Imaging Switzerland has gone bankrupt not Ilford Photo, which is a Harman Technology company. The way you wrote is misleading.

 

[MartinP]

You should be at least precise when criticising others, MartinP: Ilford Imaging Switzerland has gone bankrupt not Ilford Photo, which is a Harman Technology company. The way you wrote is misleading.

Not by accident - "Ilford" was a quote from Stone, showing how vague his remark was . . .