Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,851   Posts: 1,582,856   Online: 835
      
Page 17 of 26 FirstFirst ... 711121314151617181920212223 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 252
  1. #161
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,202
    BW400CN is capable of great results but is orange masked to print better on RA4 paper in automated machines. XP2 Super is a fantastic film without the masking, to print more easily on regular black and white paper.

    /OT

    There is a professional Tri-X, TXP 320, P for Professional, now available only in sheets but previously available in 120 though no more. It's a great film but quite different from TXT 400.

  2. #162
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Thought the 'P' was for "Pan". Yeah I know they're all panchromatic.

    Nope, just looked it up and I guess I'm wrong. Either way everyone has always know TXP as a upward swept "studio film" that lacks a compressive shoulder.

    Anyway, all Tri-X films are pro level films.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #163
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,636
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by ADOX Fotoimpex View Post
    This film was sold to Freestyle by Kodak prior to Kodak going into chapter 11.
    It´s for sure a good deal today. But will it keep film allive for long if costs for the materials, labour and energy are higher than the end users price?
    Companies need to make a profit. For some reason I am under the impression that photographers in general deny this to film producing companies. They are all bust by now except for Fuji. Do you really think you made them to rhich?

    Mirko
    Just for the record, not everyone thinks like that. I understand completely the need to charge an amount that will cover costs AND supply sufficient profit to make it all worthwhile.

    Sadly, most film consumers are still stuck in the old mindset that price is king and the customer always comes first. This is no longer the case. Manufacturers and customers now exist in something like a symbiotic relationship where both sides must give something in order to get something.

    I wish more film buyers would realize this and be more willing to spend realistic money for their film. Film photography should be important enough for photographers to give up something else in their lives in order to be able to pay fairly for the film, paper and chemistry they want. In doing so they would also help assure the future availability of these products.

    It's not very hard to price a company out of existence these days by demanding cheaper and cheaper products. Do that and in the end everybody will lose.

    Ken
    "They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."

    — Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs

  4. #164
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,202
    +1 Ken.

  5. #165

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    896
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    35mm is for amateurs hehehehe
    What a miserable statement ;-)

  6. #166
    ozphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,137
    Images
    1
    I buy what I like - and Agfa was *always* more expensive (and a hell of a lot harder to come by) than the other big brands. I didn't care - the results I achieved were fantastic and I was (and still am) more than happy to pay extra for it.

    That does not mean however, that I'm willing to pay the (often) outrageous prices that float around Evilbay etc - more often often than not, outright price gouging!!. Give me a fair price, for a good product and I'll buy it - try to rip me off, and I'll ignore you, and shop elsewhere.

    Companies go into business to make money - that is a given, and yes, "boutique" products do attract a premium - but there's a difference between a fair premium and ripping the customer off. I'd rather pay a little more and see it remain available, than expect it to be priced under it's fair-market value, and see it disappear forever.

    Lets face it, film photography is now a "niche" market, and we are extremely lucky to have companies like Ilford (Simon) and Adox (Mirko) who can see the potential in keeping it alive for years to come - but that does come at a (premium) cost, otherwise they'll end up falling by the wayside and we won't have any supplies (or only have one company who charges like a wounded bull!) to look forward to.

    It makes perfect business sense to remove *any* product from the shelf, if it costs more to produce than they make in return - no matter how much we want it to remain.

    Maybe that's the way it will end up - only a few *niche* companies making film products, that will attract a premium price, but at least we will be happy that we can still shoot film. Otherwise it will, quite probably, become a thing of the past that we will only be able to reminisce over as we flip through our neg sleeves and contact sheets.

  7. #167

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Ringerike, Norway
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Acros100 for example, shoot it on 35mm, then 120, then we go to use 4x5 and it's twice the price of everything else in the same family, it makes no sense, at least none that we can think of. Is the price from 120 deferred to 4x5 in a market they assume can handle the difference? keeping costs down on the 120 versions? or is there some extreme extra waste associated with producing it in 4x5 that bumps up the cost to double?
    AFAIK sheet film is usually coated on a different film base than 135 and 120 films, which means you can't just coat one master roll and divide it into 135, 120 and 4x5. If the sheet film market is smaller than the 135 market higher prices for sheet film are to be expected, as the overhead is probably about the same per master roll but fewer customers to split the cost on.

    (This is just speculation from reading PE's tales of film manufacturing, I don't actually know if this is the reason for higher cost of sheet film.)

  8. #168
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,975
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Arctic amateur View Post
    AFAIK sheet film is usually coated on a different film base than 135 and 120 films, which means you can't just coat one master roll and divide it into 135, 120 and 4x5. If the sheet film market is smaller than the 135 market higher prices for sheet film are to be expected, as the overhead is probably about the same per master roll but fewer customers to split the cost on.

    (This is just speculation from reading PE's tales of film manufacturing, I don't actually know if this is the reason for higher cost of sheet film.)
    That would make sense... that would also explain why the Rollei IR400 film seems more even when it goes to 4x5 size because it's flimsy as hell because it's not coated on a thicker base and probably is all from the same master roll... that's all an assumption I don't feel like researching it lol, but it would make sense.

    Still, a thicker base material isn't THAT much more, and fuji is not a tiny company, and the film sells at a higher rate so it shouldn't be such a difference even if it's a different base. Meh, I just want them to keep it around and keep it at a reasonable price... I know, it's one or the other, but still ...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #169
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,975
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    BW400CN is capable of great results but is orange masked to print better on RA4 paper in automated machines. XP2 Super is a fantastic film without the masking, to print more easily on regular black and white paper.

    /OT

    There is a professional Tri-X, TXP 320, P for Professional, now available only in sheets but previously available in 120 though no more. It's a great film but quite different from TXT 400.
    Right because LF is a professional format and medium format are professional formats, I don't think TXP320 was ever offered in 35mm hehe (guys I'm totally messing around don't take this part seriously). but the fact that Trix pan professional came in 120 at one time and in LF as well even now, indicates that THAT is the professional version of tri-x remember it's tri x pan PROFESSIONAL regular tri-x on the drugstore shelf isn't as fine grained as the pan professional stuff. Heck i've compared some pan professional stuff from before the reformulation to the new 400TX stuff and it's still finer grained than the new stuff (marginally but still) so anyway my point is made, Tri-x (400TX) is the NON-professional version and the TXP320 is the Professional version...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #170
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Pretty sure you're going to have to prove 320TXP is more fine grained than 400TX in 120 format, sir. :-)

    Either way, who cares. Both great films. Both PRO (whatever the hell that even means).
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin