220 B&W - What to do?

[Q.G.]

I have just picked up shooting 220 on portrait sessions. I'll use it while it's here. What if we all got together to see if Kodak would do a special order like they do for ultra large formats and other things?

Do you think we would be able to come to a decision which film they should produce in 220 format for us?

[aoresteen]

Do you think we would be able to come to a decision which film they should produce in 220 format for us?

For a black & white film yes. It will be either Plus-X or Tri-X. One factor for the loss of TXP 220 was that TXP in 120 rolls didn't sell that well either. They stopped making BOTH roll products.

Since Kodak is still making Plus-X 120 and Tri-X 120, they don't have to do a 'new' emulsion coating. They just need to cut the existing 120 film twice as long.

[2F/2F]

For a black & white film yes. It will be either Plus-X or Tri-X. One factor for the loss of TXP 220 was that TXP in 120 rolls didn't sell that well either. They stopped making BOTH roll products.

Since Kodak is still making Plus-X 120 and Tri-X 120, they don't have to do a 'new' emulsion coating. They just need to cut the existing 120 film twice as long.

I'd certainly buy a gross of both or either...as I should have done with TXP last year. I kept telling myself, "You should stock up. It probably won't be long for this world," but I never did, and then it was gone practically overnight once the announcement was made.

However, I'd also be thrilled to have T-Max 100 and/or 400 as choices.

If there is a special run, I'd like to sign on for at least 10, and maybe 20 pro packs. Not quite a gross, actually...

[SWphoto]

I thought that 220 film is not just twice as long, but that it is on a thinner base stock. That would be why making 220 available is not simply a matter of cutting it "twice as long"

[Jeff Bannow]

I'd be in for a bunch as well.

[lxdude]

I thought that 220 film is not just twice as long, but that it is on a thinner base stock. That would be why making 220 available is not simply a matter of cutting it "twice as long"

Base stock is the same thickness for 120 and 220.

[flatulent1]

If Kodak (or anyone else) were to do a special run of 220 B&W, count me in for a pile of it.

Being a Mamiya 645 user I don't have special 220 backs languishing under a pile of unwashed laundry, just several inserts, which is no real loss.

[Q.G.]

For a black & white film yes. It will be either Plus-X or Tri-X. [...]

There we go.
I have no interest in either film, but would love T-Max in 220 format.

[Q.G.]

If Kodak (or anyone else) were to do a special run of 220 B&W, count me in for a pile of it.

Being a Mamiya 645 user I don't have special 220 backs languishing under a pile of unwashed laundry, just several inserts, which is no real loss.

No loss at all, considering that there still is 220 film you can put on those inserts.

[JBrunner]

IRRC Simon said the problem for Ilford with 220 is that the machine that spools leaders and packages it is dead worn out. Being essentially a rare and custom thing, no parts are available, and the investment needed to replace or rebuild the thing could never be recovered with present demand. It is a bit of a catch 22- falling availability ultimately kills demand, but in this case, unfortunately, I feel pretty certain that 220 in B&W is done and gone. I'd dearly love to be wrong. The vast majority of it was used in applications that don't shoot film as a rule these days.