Photokina: Positive news for film

[Aurelien]

"APX/Retro:
We have sold out the Agfa Germany made APX 400 film 35mm. 135-36 not 30,5m.
The successor is the Agfa-Gevaert 400 ISO film, coated onto a 100 micron SYNTHETIC film base,
with the same developing parameters like the old one.
We have only changed the FILMBASE für the 35mm version, nothing else.
For rollfilm in the near future."

A mail from :
"Hartmuth Schroeder DGPh, Hon.ES-ÖGPh
Director
MACO PHOTO PRODUCTS
Hans O. Mahn GmbH & Co. KG
Brookstieg 4
22145 Hamburg-Stapelfeld"

[AgX]

Aurelien,

to my understanding this quotation means means that the Rollei Retro 400S is the same as the Agfapan APX 400S, a gone security film of the Agfa Leverkusen range.

Or Agfa has custom-made again an APX400 emulsion and coated it...

[AgX]

Keep in mind that both companies (Flemish mother and German doughter) were called Agfa-Gevaert.

[Aurelien]

"Retro 400S:
This film is Agfa-Gevaert made - no blue, glass clear, like our Rollei Infrared.

There is no "S"-emulsion, the difference is only "S"-film base.
"S" stands for SYNTHETIC."

I understand that as : the emulsion is the APX 400 one, corated onto a Clear PET base.

The former Agfapan 400S was already a ordinar agfapan 400 emulsion coated on a bluish PET base, like another maco film, the maco 400 cube...

I have a lot of agfapan400S in my fridge, and I use it when I want an old fashion look, very grainy. So It will be easier to test the difference...

[Henning Serger]

Originally Posted by PBrooks

Did they say when the Rollei ATP would be available in 120?

Yes, they said it will be available during the next weeks.

Concerning Retro 400S: no need for speculation and interpretation of different data sheets. Data sheets never tell you the whole story about a film, how it looks and works.
If you are interested and want to know how this film works, try it and look at the results. If you like the results, all is fine. If you don't like the results, all is fine as well, because there are enough excellent alternatives in the ISO 400/27° range on the market.
Don't worry, be happy. Life is good to us BW Photographers these days .

Best regards,
Henning

[AgX]

Originally Posted by Aurelien

I understand that as : the emulsion is the APX 400 one, corated onto a Clear PET base.

The former Agfapan 400S was already a ordinar agfapan 400 emulsion coated on a bluish PET base, like another maco film, the maco 400 cube...

If this film is an APX 400 recently coated on a clear, colourless PET base this will be good news for all APX lovers as they’ll get a better material (except for that light-piping effect).


But why does Maco give not only contradictory, but even wrong information as hinted by my reference to their datasheet?


Some time ago I called Maco here a most innovative company as they bring us materials otherwise not obtainable.

But the same time they are most innovative in spreading weird information.

Another example:
They once had a film called Scanfilm. A maskless C-41 colour film. Strange enough they called it as well a colour film as a B&W film. Strange enough untill one realizes that they most probably were referring to the fact that a maskless colour film is more easily printed on orthochromatic paper. But still this does not make it a chromogenic B&W film.

Then they announced to have a successor for the Scanfilm, called Digibase. However this film is called a B&W film to be processed as C-41. Thus a chromogenic B&W film to my understanding. However in a test posted on the net this film turned out to be maskless colour film. (Most probably the other maskless Agfa C-41 film.)

This information policy of them which makes any of their statements doubtful had as result that recently I even was publicly accused of knowingly spreading false information just for me quoting Maco’s webshop catalogue…

I consider this counterproductive for any effort to show that there still is a wide scope of film at offer.

I also doubt whether Agfa who are meanwhile referred to by Maco repeatedly welcome such a misleading policy as any bad surprise with a Rollei film turning out to be different than stated in a Maco datasheet could be erroneous blamed on them.

[Henning Serger]

Dear AgX,

first: you have a pm with further information.

Originally Posted by AgX

Some time ago I called Maco here a most innovative company as they bring us materials otherwise not obtainable.

I think you are right. They are investing a lot in introducing these products to the market. So we as photographers have more alternatives and some unique products.
Kodak, Fuji, Agfa-Gevaert, Foma and Lucky are investing in R&D for improved products. Ilford has concentrated on keeping their full range of products available.
Different companies, different strategies. All in all we are profiting as customers.

Originally Posted by AgX

Then they announced to have a successor for the Scanfilm, called Digibase. However this film is called a B&W film to be processed as C-41. Thus a chromogenic B&W film to my understanding. However in a test posted on the net this film turned out to be maskless colour film. (Most probably the other maskless Agfa C-41 film.)

When Maco introduced this product, they were a bit uncertain which characteristics of this film they should emphasize. A maskless C-41 film is unique on the market. Therefore at the beginning the information was not optimal and needed improvement. Lots of photographers gave Maco hints and reported their experiences with this film. Due to that the information got more detailed and was improved.
Maco frankly admitted the mistakes in information policy being made at the beginning. This film with its different characteristics compared to other C-41 films was totally new for them as well, and they had to learn a lot about it.
Human beings make mistakes, so I think there is nothing really worth to complain about. They said "sorry", for me it is o.k.

But that is all off topic. Let's go back to this years Photokina.

Best regards,
Henning

[John_Nikon_F]

Henning,

Thanks for the report. Good to see that the film vs digi wars are finally coming to a close, as well.

-J

[Aurelien]

Yes, but the bad news came yesterday from Bergger:
Mr Gerard told me: "I didn't decided yet to launch or not the production of films, because of the low level of the market, and the production minima that are too high..."

Seems like a "NO", no?

And I am very sad to loose my fetich BRF 200

[haris]

Thank you for report Mr. Serger, it made me smile.