Serious problem with 'Rollei' film - when RPX 25 is not?

[Tom Kershaw]

The Rollei film range contains Agfa Aviphot 200 and Agfa Aviphot 80 in two different quality and price categories. If you know Ilford films in 120 format and Foma films in 120 format, then you can see which company did cutting, spooling and packing.
Rollei published in the past in german forums that RPX 100 and RPX 400 is produced for Rollei by Harman Technology, Rollei IR 400, Superpan 200 and Retro 400S are based on Agfa Aviphot 200 and Rollei 80S is based on Agfa Aviphot 80. RPX 25 is still a "secret". It is only known the film is spooled and packed by Harman Technology.

If you do some tests with RPX 25 you can see it is definitely shows the characteristic of aerialphot material and the film is infrared sensitive.
If you compare RPX 25 to Rollei 80S with an exakt test procedure (same exposure, development in one tank at the same time and analysis with a densitometer and a microscope ) you will see both films deliver equal results. They respond equal to different filters.

Thanks for the explanation. It is odd though that if the film is packaged by Harman, it hasn't been cut to the correct size.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for the explanation. It is odd though that if the film is packaged by Harman, it hasn't been cut to the correct size.

I wish you luck getting to the bottom of all of this, Tom. Even those who appear to have the information or want to believe they have the information seem to speak in riddles. They are sure of what is the truth but do not wish to give proof of that "truth" that would prove they are right beyond all reasonable doubt

There is a prize for the first person who can fully explain who makes these Rollei films, what the differences are in the various films and can name their sources of evidence. If people state certain things then either produce the evidence or say that they have no actual hard evidence but their statements are based on their conclusions based on whatever they believe their research suggests to them.

When someone like Tom asks a question that calls into doubt what they have said then they need to provide a response that answers the question or say that they cannot give an answer that fully explains matters. I look forward to that explanation.

Whenever Photrio has a discussion on Rollei it quickly resembles that of President Muffley Merkin trying to get a logical explanation from General Buck Turgidson on his conclusions based on what he believes to be the facts in the film Dr Strangelove.


pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

There is a prize for the first person who can fully explain who makes these Rollei films, what the differences are in the various films and can name their sources of evidence.

From the start of that range of films Maco employed different manufacturers and converters. See the Rollei project so to say, not as a rebranding but as blending business.
But so it was already before that, when they still applied the brand Maco for their films. But these are hardly known at Apug.

And such veiling business is also applied at the big ones. As "Kodak films" for some years now are actually manufactured by Agfa, as with microfilms.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

And such veiling business is also applied at the big ones. As "Kodak films" for some years now are actually manufactured by Agfa, as with microfilms.

The films we know as photographers are surely made by Eastman Kodak in Rochester, NY.

 

[pentaxuser]

From the start of that range of films Maco employed different manufacturers and converters. See the Rollei project so to say, not as a rebranding but as blending business.
But so it was already before that, when they still applied the brand Maco for their films. But these are hardly known at Apug.

And such veiling business is also applied at the big ones. As "Kodak films" for some years now are actually manufactured by Agfa, as with microfilms.

Thank you for making clear why things are not clear as far as Rollei films are concerned and will never be clear because of this blending process. My conclusion based on what you have said is that no-one other than presumably a few people concerned with the actual blending know the origins of specific films and what those film were when made and such people who are not contributors to Photrio are ever likely to reveal this information.

As far as Kodak films made by Agfa are concerned can you specify which films you refer to - these are presumably not the films known to and used by the general photographer. As Tom has said the Kodak films known to the general film user such as TMax or Tri-X are made by Kodak and presumably in Rochester, U.S.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[miha]

I wish you luck getting to the bottom of all of this, Tom. Even those who appear to have the information or want to believe they have the information seem to speak in riddles. They are sure of what is the truth but do not wish to give proof of that "truth" that would prove they are right beyond all reasonable doubt

There is a prize for the first person who can fully explain who makes these Rollei films, what the differences are in the various films and can name their sources of evidence. If people state certain things then either produce the evidence or say that they have no actual hard evidence but their statements are based on their conclusions based on whatever they believe their research suggests to them.

When someone like Tom asks a question that calls into doubt what they have said then they need to provide a response that answers the question or say that they cannot give an answer that fully explains matters. I look forward to that explanation.

Whenever Photrio has a discussion on Rollei it quickly resembles that of President Muffley Merkin trying to get a logical explanation from General Buck Turgidson on his conclusions based on what he believes to be the facts in the film Dr Strangelove.


pentaxuser

Perfect reasoning, pentaxuser.

 

[MattKing]

I'm afraid that anyone expecting any particular product to be manufactured by the same entity as the one branding and selling that product is living with out of date expectations.
Just about every industry seems to be moving away from that paradigm.
If you are relying on a brand name, like as not you are relying on a marketing entity.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I'm afraid that anyone expecting any particular product to be manufactured by the same entity as the one branding and selling that product is living with out of date expectations.
Just about every industry seems to be moving away from that paradigm.
If you are relying on a brand name, like as not you are relying on a marketing entity.

That does depend on the brand though. We know where ILFORD brand film and papers are manufactured for example, and that Tetenal produces chemistry for a wide range of major brands including Kodak.

 

[MattKing]

That does depend on the brand though. We know where ILFORD brand film and papers are manufactured for example, and that Tetenal produces chemistry for a wide range of major brands including Kodak.

Just as we know who actually manufactures iPhones. But we cannot buy an iPhone from them.
I guess I could be technical and say that even Ilford products are not made by Ilford - some are made by Harman, others are made by (most likely) Tetenal.
Even North American cars are at most assembled by the owners of the brand names. The parts are manufactured by a plethora of smaller manufacturers, and come from factories from all over the world.

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

Sorry to read this.
I have been shooting a lot of Rollei Ortho 25 lately in sheets and rolls.
No issue at all.
I'm in France right now and the price is less painful than in the US...
All best,
G.

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

Now if Kodak could bring back to life Trix-Ortho.... Dream on !