Some Kodak B&W Film Deletions

Signs & fragments

A
Signs & fragments

  • 1
  • 0
  • 10
Summer corn, summer storm

D
Summer corn, summer storm

  • 1
  • 1
  • 23
Horizon, summer rain

D
Horizon, summer rain

  • 0
  • 0
  • 29
$12.66

A
$12.66

  • 6
  • 5
  • 167
A street portrait

A
A street portrait

  • 1
  • 0
  • 163

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,814
Messages
2,781,227
Members
99,710
Latest member
LibbyPScott
Recent bookmarks
0

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,263
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
Despite claims from Bergger, BPF 200 has absolutely nothing to do with Super-XX other than being a nominally ISO 200 film, alas. Contrary to that article in _Shutterbug_, it wasn't a "French-made" film either in 2000. It was made by Forte in Hungary, now defunct, and it was identical to Fortepan 200.


David, the Forte/Bergger 200 was based on Kodak's pre-WWII Super-XX emulsion which was introduced in 1938 and also made & coated at Kodak's Hungarian factory, it was an old style thick emulsion and probable had only been upgraded/improved slightly over the years.


Ian
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
I remember a few years ago Bergger BPF 200 was being promoted as not being re-branded Fortepan 200, but I can't imagine this was the case.

Tom

I am fairly positive that BPF 200 was Fortepan 200. Sandy King tested both films using the BTZS method when they were available and posted results in the Azo forum and could detect no significant difference. John Minakais from J&C, whom I no longer regard as a reliable source, claimed that he visited the Forte factory, and both films were being cut from the same master rolls. While I think we should probably be a bit circumspect about anything John told us in those days, his information about how East European films were sold and rebranded seems generally to have been reliable, and Sandy's tests did bear this out, and the film doesn't lie.

Ian Grant said:
David, the Forte/Bergger 200 was based on Kodak's pre-WWII Super-XX emulsion which was introduced in 1938 and also made & coated at Kodak's Hungarian factory, it was an old style thick emulsion and probable had only been upgraded/improved slightly over the years.

I know that this is often believed about the films made in the former Hungarian Kodak plant, but given economic conditions in Eastern Europe in the time since Kodak sold the plant, and the general level of manufacturing in the Eastern Bloc, I find it highly unlikely that the film was unchanged during that time. Before Bergger started selling it, I don't think there would have been much of an East European market for a film that was as expensive as Super-XX (about twice the cost of Tri-X), or that they could have continued pouring as much silver into film during the Hunt Brothers bubble of the 1980s. They would have had to have found ways to make it cheaper. Fortepan 400, before it was upgraded in its last phase, didn't have anything like the density range of Tri-X, and Fortepan 200 didn't have the density range or color response of even the outdated Super-XX I've had the good fortune to use.
 

bowie

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
33
Format
35mm Pan
Hello!
After delating KODACHROME with expiry date December 2010 I have realized that I had never seen TXP 320 with expiry date after September 2011 / February 2012. My suspect that Koday is going to discontinue TXP came true :sad:
Just have bought huge amount of TXP 320 available in Poland to freeze them
All good things pass away...
 

cmo

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
1,321
Format
35mm RF
My suspect that Koday is going to discontinue TXP came true :sad:

Even if Kodak does not produce a 220 film any more or the 320 version, why should they stop producing the world's best-selling B&W film?
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Didn't Super-XX in its last incarnation(s) also use gold in the emulsion? Ron?

This was part of the theory behind why it was so expensive, but I think Ron expressed some doubts as to whether the amount of gold in the formula could have been responsible for the difference in price, if it was even a factor.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Gold was used at about 3 mg / every 108 grams of silver in Super XX IIRC. This is an estimate as I never worked to make and sensitize that particular emulsion. There were several other chemicals present as well including TAI (Tetra Aza Indene). It is similar to the formula described by Jim Browning on his web site, but more concentrated and with different run times.

PE
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Hello!
After delating KODACHROME with expiry date December 2010 I have realized that I had never seen TXP 320 with expiry date after September 2011 / February 2012.

My latest batch expires 06/2012.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,263
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
I know that this is often believed about the films made in the former Hungarian Kodak plant, but given economic conditions in Eastern Europe in the time since Kodak sold the plant, and the general level of manufacturing in the Eastern Bloc, I find it highly unlikely that the film was unchanged during that time. Before Bergger started selling it, I don't think there would have been much of an East European market for a film that was as expensive as Super-XX (about twice the cost of Tri-X), or that they could have continued pouring as much silver into film during the Hunt Brothers bubble of the 1980s. They would have had to have found ways to make it cheaper. Fortepan 400, before it was upgraded in its last phase, didn't have anything like the density range of Tri-X, and Fortepan 200 didn't have the density range or color response of even the outdated Super-XX I've had the good fortune to use.

Looking at a Kodak advert for 1938/9 Super-XX is listed alongside Plus-X as a newly introduced film with 4x the speed of Pan-X, available as a stills & cine film, this is well before Tri-X, and it competed with Ilford's newly introduced HP2 which was slightly faster.

I suspect that it was Kodak's Super-XX that changed & evolved, possible when Tri-X was introduced, leaving the Hungarian product behindm evolving in it's own way.

Ian
 

bowie

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
33
Format
35mm Pan
My latest batch expires 06/2012.

I bought TXP 320 two year ago in B&H, their expiry date was September 2011. My latest purchase, fresh from the shop, also had Sept 2011 date. TXP beeing produced a few years ago is still available. It was not massive seller negative, that is the reason why Kodak discontinued it :sad:
 

B&Wpositive

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
475
Location
USA
Format
35mm
Was just listening to an interview of Mr. DiSabato by Scott Sheppard on this topic (it explains everything in detail), and he goes over the available black and white films about 2/3 of the way through. Only 4 films in addition to TXP were mentioned: Plus-X, Tri-X 400, T-Max 100, and T-Max 400. T-Max 3200 was not mentioned, curiously.

http://cdn3.libsyn.com/insidemedian...30&nva=20100217044830&t=0ce54bbbb2c566edb88e2
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
I thought he clearly stated that TMZ was not being discontinued? If it wasn't mentioned in that interview, he did say in an email (quoted somewhere in this thread) that it was not currently discontinued.

The announcement at the center of this conversation is not entirely accurate as no decision has been made to discontinue T-Max P3200 (TMZ).
 

B&Wpositive

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
475
Location
USA
Format
35mm
I thought he clearly stated that TMZ was not being discontinued? If it wasn't mentioned in that interview, he did say in an email (quoted somewhere in this thread) that it was not currently discontinued.

Correct. I was just wondering why he did not mention it in the interview. Perhaps he forgot it? It is after all, a current product.
 

DLawson

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
320
Location
Dayton, Ohio
Format
35mm
I thought he clearly stated that TMZ was not being discontinued? If it wasn't mentioned in that interview, he did say in an email (quoted somewhere in this thread) that it was not currently discontinued.

The original post stated that it was in the discontinuation list, but with an uncertain end date. That was later "clarified" to not being discontinued.

Given the way Kodak's communications have gone in the past, that is usually the pattern for "discontinued but we don't want to deal with the fallout yet." Time will tell.

For now, the official word seems to be "not discontinued."
 

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
The original post stated that it was in the discontinuation list, but with an uncertain end date. That was later "clarified" to not being discontinued.

Given the way Kodak's communications have gone in the past, that is usually the pattern for "discontinued but we don't want to deal with the fallout yet." Time will tell.

For now, the official word seems to be "not discontinued."

I agree with your analysis. Including the part about, for now, it's not discontinued. I mentioned earlier in this thread that Kodak's definition of discontinued might be different than ours. We want to know if they are still making it. They think in terms of still selling it.
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
Ah...This has been a bad past couple of years. I wish I had thousands of dollars to stockpile:

EPP
E100GX
TXP 120/220
Fuji Pro 800 120/220
Fuji T64 (and EPY, though I always preferred the Fuji)
Portra 100T
HIE (and also EIR)
Polaroid Type 665

Probably missed a few...but these are the ones I'll really feel the pain from.
 

B&Wpositive

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
475
Location
USA
Format
35mm
Ah...This has been a bad past couple of years. I wish I had thousands of dollars to stockpile:

EPP
E100GX
TXP 120/220
Fuji Pro 800 120/220
Fuji T64 (and EPY, though I always preferred the Fuji)
Portra 100T
HIE (and also EIR)
Polaroid Type 665

Probably missed a few...but these are the ones I'll really feel the pain from.

What's with Fuji 800Z in 120/220? People are claiming it's discontinued. There's already a thread on it, so don't answer here.
 

dr5chrome

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
461
Format
Medium Format
dupes, copy, interpositive...

PE;
I have devised a method of producing copy negs, internegs & dupes "without" image generation loss. Sometimes even enhancing but in all cases there is a 99% + retention without special film.

You are free to send me some images or call and ill share my findings,, on the house.

regards

dw




I am using a hybrid method to produce internegs in B&W, but I find that digital cannot replicate a color transparency or color negative with any degree of fidelity yet. So, duping is a real problem.

PE
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom