Who's used Kodak XX/5222 film?

jolefler · Sep 18, 2007

At the price, is it worthwhile as a general purpose film for personal (not professional) use? Did you like the results? Thanks!

Jo

clay · Sep 18, 2007

It looks like Tri-X did 25 years ago. Good stuff for a slightly vintage look.

jolefler said:
At the price, is it worthwhile as a general purpose film for personal (not professional) use? Did you like the results? Thanks!

Jo

jolefler · Sep 18, 2007

Sounds quite usable. Especially at "short end" pricing.

I forgot to include a question about member's dealings with Film Emporium and their reactions.

Roger Hicks · Sep 18, 2007

Assuming it's a movie film, it may scratch more readily than still camera films. Many movie films do.

David A. Goldfarb · Sep 18, 2007

It's kind of grainy and somewhat lower in contrast than most still films, but it's interesting.

Here's a thread on the topic--

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

jolefler · Sep 18, 2007

Thanks, all !

Mark Layne · Sep 18, 2007

clay said:
It looks like Tri-X did 25 years ago. Good stuff for a slightly vintage look.

This is exactly what Tom Abrahamsson told me about it the other day and he knows his TX.
Mark

clay · Sep 18, 2007

I haven't noticed it being any more susceptible to scratching than regular still camera films. The biggest difference is in the look of the grain when compared to modern Tri-X and the not-as-good anti-halation layer, which will result in a little more highlight bleed than more modern films. All in all, quite usable stuff, and if I recall, about $120 for 400 feet of the stuff. It isn't used that often apparently, and you can wait a long time for so-called short ends to surface at film emporium. I just bit the bullet and bought the full 400 feet. I don't regret it.

Roger Hicks said:
Assuming it's a movie film, it may scratch more readily than still camera films. Many movie films do.

Roger Hicks · Sep 18, 2007

clay said:
I haven't noticed it being any more susceptible to scratching than regular still camera films.

Dear Clay,

Thanks. The supercoating of movie films used to be softer, or possibly even non-existent (I forget), but it does not surprise me that modern coating technology has improved this. I am grateful for your updating my knowledge and apologize for introducing an ancient irrelevance -- though presumably, if I had heard about the scratching risk, others had too, so it is not just my mind that is set at rest.

Sounds like interesting stuff. Have fun with it!

Cheers,

Roger

erikg · Sep 18, 2007

I got a couple hundred feet from Film Emporium last year. I agree, it looks a lot like the Tri-x I used in school, and it seems pretty tough stuff, no more prone to scratching than other Kodak films. Looks real good in Sprint developer. Film Emporium is a good place to buy from, it seems best to call them to make sure they have some short ends in stock, rather than just going by the web site. It is a good film to mess around with.

Who's used Kodak XX/5222 film?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency