Some Kodak B&W Film Deletions

Ken Nadvornick · Feb 4, 2010

fotch said:
Film producers are fighting for survival like never before.

True, that. And therein lies the disconnect. As well as, I suspect, some of the source of irritation by so many with Kodak.

You see, by their own repeated public admissions, the "survival" they are "fighting for... like never before" is not as a long-term "film producer."

Mind you, not my characterization here. Theirs. So don't shoot the messenger.

Ken

thisismyname09 · Feb 4, 2010

There goes the first film I ever shot in 120. Though I can't say that I could praise it as others have, as the first 20 or so rolls of film I've shot have been pretty horrible in terms of proper exposure and development.

Kevin Kehler · Feb 4, 2010

fotch said:
You think that is going to help? If you like Kodak, keep buying it. If they can make a profit, they will keep making it. But, if your employer suddenly quit paying you, would you continue to work for them? Film producers are fighting for survival like never before.

I think what a lot of us are upset about is the abruptness of the decisions. Normally when a product is being discontinued (without an obvious replacement), there is a "production will cease in Spring of 20XX" so people are aware of the coming change. It's the "we're still making it" on Tuesday and the "it's discontinued" on Wednesday that annoys us. If I knew I had 4 months to stock up prior to discontinuance, I would happily purchase while mourning the loss of a film; it's the sudden disappearance followed by the need to pay premium for now-discontinued film/or sudden need to change films (in mid-project, mid-job, etc.) that irks me.

Yes I know Tri-X is still there but Tri-X and TXP are very different films. Think of this, Ansel Adams used TXP for much of his work; the film of Ansel Adams is soon to be history.

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 5, 2010

Ansel Adams would have used TXT, which was the sheet film version of Tri-X in his day, which was yet something else from modern TXP sheet film. TXT was replaced with TXP in sheets a few years ago. I probably still have some TXT in the freezer.

dr5chrome · Feb 5, 2010

On my end I have not been able to verify this information.
As I continue to try to get official replies, TXP is a premier dr5 film. To loose it will be more of a loss than tech-pan was.

As the original post stated only the 220 film was getting the ax and that TXP 120 was 'not' getting discontinued. 'TX' in 120 is also a terrific film and in dr5 is kodaks fast film, though HP5 far outperforms it in speed, sometimes you just want TriX.

I didnt think I would see the day Kodak would mess with their staple films, even as film is making a rise in the recent months.

Maybe its time... maybe its time for the doc to stop saying; "maybe we'll just take off the toe".. when really he should cut the whole damn leg off.
are you listening Kodak??

dw

viridari · Feb 5, 2010

fotch said:
You think that is going to help? If you like Kodak, keep buying it. If they can make a profit, they will keep making it. But, if your employer suddenly quit paying you, would you continue to work for them? Film producers are fighting for survival like never before.

Why should I be loyal to any one manufacturer? My money should go to a company that gives me what I want. The product itself is part of what I want, but the peace of mind that my go-to film will be around 5-10 years from now is definitely part of the equation.

Kodak seems to be playing slash & burn policy with its film products. This doesn't give me any peace of mind.

Ilford seems to have figured out how to succeed in this shrinking market. I might not be seeing things for what they are, but I personally believe that if I switch from TMAX400 to Delta 400, I'll still be able to buy Delta 400 in 10 years (let's revisit this thread then and see if I'm right or not).

For my purposes, comparing the two, Kodak doesn't give me any advantage over Ilford except for about a 40 cent lower price per roll for its T grain 400 speed film. But I wouldn't bet money that TMY2 will still be around in 5 years, based on Kodak's willingness to "consolidate".

Kodak isn't fighting for my money. It's discontinuing products that I like to buy. Ilford hasn't done that to me yet.

kauffman v36 · Feb 5, 2010

if plus-x goes im done. im not a fan of tmax3200 and have 10 35mm rolls sitting in the fridge for 3 months now. i need a slow speed film thats not rollei or pan F. which means im using my tech pan, my panatomic x, or the only one available today plus-x. the first two i just have piles. i am in the latter stage of my "trying every film" phase and can say i keep coming back to all Kodak non-tmy films. tmax 100 and 400 are not my cup of tea. i should really try txp 320 to see what its all about but i love tx400 and px125, other than tech pan of course. and i too, thought film sales were rising every so slightly in the last couple months, people are getting over the digital age hype, more and more ask me about my film cameras and how "cool" they are.

Sim2 · Feb 5, 2010

mikebarger said:
What do you think young couples just entering the consumer market are buying, the market is still growing.

I rather like this, :confused: digi has been around for years now as a mature product. Young people have grown up knowing nothing other than digi pics, young couples aren't shifting to digital - they were digital already. We view the market in a skewed way - thinking that just because "decent" full frame high res cameras such as the 5D/A900 have become affordable that the market has finally become mature. For the vast majority, the digi market was mature three or four years ago. Digi market is saturated with users, the only growth there is model/brand swapping not converts from analogue.

mikebarger · Feb 5, 2010

My point is "new" households buying necessities are buying digi not film. The population grows everyday and film is getting a very small part of "this" growth.

Mike

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2010

kauffman v36 said:
if plus-x goes im done. im not a fan of tmax3200 and have 10 35mm rolls sitting in the fridge for 3 months now. i need a slow speed film thats not rollei or pan F. which means im using my tech pan, my panatomic x, or the only one available today plus-x. the first two i just have piles. i am in the latter stage of my "trying every film" phase and can say i keep coming back to all Kodak non-tmy films. tmax 100 and 400 are not my cup of tea. i should really try txp 320 to see what its all about but i love tx400 and px125, other than tech pan of course. and i too, thought film sales were rising every so slightly in the last couple months, people are getting over the digital age hype, more and more ask me about my film cameras and how "cool" they are.

You could always put some ND filters in front of TMax 3200 to slow it down to Plus-X speed. :rolleyes:

Steve

kristopher_lawrence · Feb 5, 2010

mikebarger said:
My point is "new" households buying necessities are buying digi not film. The population grows everyday and film is getting a very small part of "this" growth.

Mike

Don't worry about young people shooting film, they do more than the baby boomers... I am 26, semi-pro, and I shoot ONLY film. Here where I live, there a bunch of young photogs and I would say that more than a half are using film. They are not hardcore users, but they use it. All the older photogs are fully digital.

Also, I bet that the impossible project's reviving of polaroid will help. It will draw young people to try film, and many will be, like me, totally hooked.

Darkroom317 · Feb 5, 2010

kristopher_lawrence said:
Don't worry about young people shooting film, they do more than the baby boomers... I am 26, semi-pro, and I shoot ONLY film. Here where I live, there a bunch of young photogs and I would say that more than a half are using film. They are not hardcore users, but they use it. All the older photogs are fully digital.

Also, I bet that the impossible project's reviving of polaroid will help. It will draw young people to try film, and many will be, like me, totally hooked.

I'm 20. This is very true even in my area. But, as I said before a lot of the older photographers in the clubs I belong to didn't even know that film was still available, particularly 120.

Kris

Terrence Brennan · Feb 5, 2010

mikebarger said:
Concerning movie film, I believe I've seen PE warn of serious problems for film when it goes away. I don't recall the reasoning, but I "think" it had to do with 35mm motion picture carrying the overhead for everything else film.

Well, it looks like Ilford figured that out. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't they jettison motion picture and aerial film when they reorganized a few years ago?

I'm not a businessperson, but isn't there a saying which goes something like, "...in business either get big or stay small..."? It would appear that Ilford has decided to supply a number of core products, which have traditionally been their bread and butter, not trying to be everything-to-everybody.

I stopped using Kodak products when they axed B&W paper a few years ago, in favor of AGFA. Now that's gone, so I stick with Ilford & Kentmere products. The only non-Ilford products I have bought recently was some EFKE KB50 film (I didn't like it) and a dozen rolls of Kodachrome, for one last gasp before it dies in 10 months.

When Kodak announced that they were ceasing production of B&W paper, I realized for the first time that they would slowly eliminate their conventional line of products, and, correct me if I am wrong, but it has been pretty much a downward spiral, has it not? If memory serves, they have introduced a few new colour products in the last several years, but for us B&W traditionalists, it's been a one-way street. Their actions kind of remind me of something my father told me when I was a teenager, lo those 40-plus years ago: "Son, in life there is only one way to coast...and that's downhill."

Yes, Ilford trimmed their Kentmere line when they acquired them, but they are sticking with their core products, staying small, as it were. Even EFKE has a new IR film; can't wait to try that!

But Kodak is, as far as I am concerned, a dead-end street. They made certain business decisions, for the good of the business. I understand, and respect, their decisions.

I also made a decision, and that was to stick with the products manufactured by Ilford and Kentmere. As long as they supply, I will buy.

Sal Santamaura · Feb 5, 2010

Chazzy said:
...What does Fuji make in 400 speed black and white films?...

As soon as product in the distribution pipeline sells, nothing:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Note that Presto400 is what Fuji calls Neopan 400 in Japan. It may be time to figure out a way to make HP5 Plus work for you.

Tim Gray · Feb 5, 2010

Terrence Brennan said:
Well, it looks like Ilford figured that out. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't they jettison motion picture and aerial film when they reorganized a few years ago?

I'm not a businessperson, but isn't there a saying which goes something like, "...in business either get big or stay small..."? It would appear that Ilford has decided to supply a number of core products, which have traditionally been their bread and butter, not trying to be everything-to-everybody.

....

If memory serves, they have introduced a few new colour products in the last several years, but for us B&W traditionalists, it's been a one-way street. Their actions kind of remind me of something my father told me when I was a teenager, lo those 40-plus years ago: "Son, in life there is only one way to coast...and that's downhill."

Kodak's problem with respect to the first part of your statement is that they are already big. I think they've downsized a lot (reasonably successfully), but they've got machinery that still designed to run a lot of film through it, because of the motion picture side of things. Even if that machinery is flexible and can do different products. Even if they don't run MP and still film on the same machines, there has to be some crossover somewhere with the staff.

Enough of that though. I'll take PE's word for it there.

Kodak did introduce 400TMY-2. That's something new for us B&W traditionalists. A new B&W film in 2007. Who would have thunk?

As far as color in the last couple years, while they have obviously cut some products, we have gotten a revised Portra line (160NC-2, 160VC-2, etc.) and Portra 400NC was revised again on top of that (400NC-3). And we can't forget Ektar 100.

Alex Bishop-Thorpe · Feb 5, 2010

Sal Santamaura said:
As soon as product in the distribution pipeline sells, nothing:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Note that Presto400 is what Fuji calls Neopan 400 in Japan. It may be time to figure out a way to make HP5 Plus work for you.

It's still available in 35mm, at least.

More on topic - this sucks. I shoot Ilford, but none of this bodes well for our field in general. I could see how certain colour slide emulsions wouldn't be viable, but black and white seemed to be making a comeback in recent years. It'll be one dark day for film photography when you cant buy a roll of Plus-X or Tri-X, and hopefully we won't see that for a good long time, but this doesn't really instill confidence.

lxdude · Feb 5, 2010

filmamigo said:
I was really starting to like BW400CN in 120. Grainless and great tone.

I actually believed BW400CN might be one of the last films standing... with Kodak really streamlining most lines into C41 (ala Ektar "replacing" the E6 films).

I imagined a time 15 years from now when the Kodak catalog would consist only of Ektar 100, Portra 400NC, BW400CN and Tri-X 400.

Guess I was wrong.

Yeah, me too.

Tim Gray · Feb 5, 2010

Fleath said:
More on topic - this sucks. I shoot Ilford, but none of this bodes well for our field in general. I could see how certain colour slide emulsions wouldn't be viable, but black and white seemed to be making a comeback in recent years. It'll be one dark day for film photography when you cant buy a roll of Plus-X or Tri-X, and hopefully we won't see that for a good long time, but this doesn't really instill confidence.

I totally agree. This does suck. And if Kodak and Fuji are doing this, it could be very possible that Ilford is feeling some pain right now too.

Existing Light · Feb 5, 2010

I've never been a fan of Kodak B&W films, probably because I started off with Ilford film in my first photography class and never really gave Kodak much of a chance. I hate to see their stuff get axed, though. I'm imagining how I would react if there was no more HP5+ (which is my favorite film), and I'd be quite unhappy.

I do like Kodak's color films. I love really Love Portra (all speeds) and Ektar, and I'd hate for either of them to go. Even worse for me would be the loss of their consumer color, because that's mostly what I shoot when I do color (I probably shoot one roll of Portra or Ektar for every 5 rolls of Ultramax

Hopefully Ilford will make good use of Kodak's smaller share of the market

Terrence Brennan · Feb 5, 2010

Tim Gray said:
Kodak did introduce 400TMY-2. That's something new for us B&W traditionalists. A new B&W film in 2007. Who would have thunk?
.

I stand corrected.

Their catalogue of B&W products has shrunk like crazy; does anybody really think that there's a "future" with their B&W materials? I think not.

"This may seem simple, but you need to give customers what they want, not what you think they want. And, if you do this, people will keep coming back. John Ilhan"

If there is no product, the people won't come back, will they?

SWphoto · Feb 5, 2010

Tim Gray said:
I totally agree. This does suck. And if Kodak and Fuji are doing this, it could be very possible that Ilford is feeling some pain right now too.

The only consolation is that if most of the users of the discontinued products go somewhere other than digital, the remaining products will pick up the business. That said, the question is "how much" and is it enough to make an impact?

wclark5179 · Feb 5, 2010

Here is an interesting page on Kodak films:

http://www.nwmangum.com/Kodak/FilmHist.html

clayne · Feb 5, 2010

Cmon Kodak!

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2010

Terrence Brennan said:
When Kodak announced that they were ceasing production of B&W paper, I realized for the first time that they would slowly eliminate their conventional line of products, and, correct me if I am wrong, but it has been pretty much a downward spiral, has it not? If memory serves, they have introduced a few new colour products in the last several years, but for us B&W traditionalists, it's been a one-way street. Their actions kind of remind me of something my father told me when I was a teenager, lo those 40-plus years ago: "Son, in life there is only one way to coast...and that's downhill."

Consider yourself corrected. Kodak has improved the TMax line of film.

Steve

Andrew Moxom · Feb 5, 2010

dr5chrome said:
On my end I have not been able to verify this information.
As I continue to try to get official replies, TXP is a premier dr5 film. To loose it will be more of a loss than tech-pan was.

As the original post stated only the 220 film was getting the ax and that TXP 120 was 'not' getting discontinued. dw

Incorrect, TXP 120 film IS affected. They say the recommended replacement is TX film.

TMax P3200 135-36, runout date to be confirmed;

Tri-X 320 in 120 format, suggested replacement Tri-X 400 120
Tri-X 320 in 220 format, no suggested replacement
Forecast runout date on the Tri-X 320 is March this year.

BW400CN 120, already gone by the look of it, & no suggested replacement

Some Kodak B&W Film Deletions

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency