Leica LTM An era ends for an old-timer

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
G

Graybeard

Longtime IIIf User
Local time
6:09 PM
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
486
Location
Hudson Valley
View My Gallery
I've been spending quite a lot of my time in my darkroom these days. It's the dead of winter here and I save my negatives, 35mm and 4x5, for this time of year when I have plenty of time for quiet hours in the darkroom. I recently acquired a Focomat enlarger and have been having a pleasant time becoming acquainted with this jewel of an instrument. Wetzlar didn't cut any corners on the Focomats.

Just today, I finished my last box of Kodak B&W paper (11x14 Polymax RC). I bought quite a lot of the stuff last year when Kodak declared that they were leaving the business. I have had Kodak darkroom materials (almost exclusively) in my darkrooms (and houses) since 1962 and certainly feel a sense of disappointment since Kodak can't seem to find a place in their brave new world for my B&W photography. I've been buying the stuff regularly; too bad Kodak didn't think my money was worth notice.

I've written Kodak off completely as a (now) unreliable supplier. I'm using home-formulated D-76 and D-72 (Dektol equivalent) and am exploring the possibilities of Mytol as a Xtol replacement. (The jury is still out with me about the incremental improvement of Xtol over freshly prepared D-76; I can probably live with my own D-76 forever, BTW). I can buy sodium thiosulfate locally for 60 cents/lb and sodium sulfite for about 50 cents/lb (both in bulk) so my fixers costs about $2/gallon.

It may be in the best interests of everyone seriously engaged in B&W work that Kodak has left the scene. This will allow the little guys (Ilford, Forte, Agfa sucessors, and others) to thrive with the somewhat smaller demand for B&W materials without the gargantuan Rochester manufacturer dictating price. Those of us working in silver/gelatin B&W will be paying more for our supplies but, with luck, we will be keeping the vendors seriously interested in our craft in business; bite the bullet, we need these guys. I am reminded of the late 1950's- early 1960's when B&W photographic materials were rather unusual and everything was supplied by mail order from a specialist supplier.

I'm now using Ilford paper and Fuji Neopan 400 film as my standard media. No complaints about either; if anything, I prefer Ilford Multigrade IV (Pearl) to Kodak Polymax lustre.

Any kindred souls out there?

Good light-

Graybeard
 
Ilford MG FB Matte warmtone, Fuji Acros in 35, 120, 4x5 Quickloads.

I hate to give up my Xtol and Tri-X though 😉

Todd
 
last I checked, the only thing that Kodak has stopped making available lately was B&W paper. I sure am not ready to give up Tr-X or D-76, and not buying Kodak out of sour grapes isn't very appealing to me. markets change, and the economy of scale that Kodak had built around their papers over the previous century certainly couldn't have been running efficiently for the last ten or twenty years. It isn't like they have a special wand and simply wave it to make a product you then pay them for. You can't reasonably expect people to think the discontinuation of their paper was a personal jab at you, any more than Ilford's current production is simply a personal favor.

I'm going to keep buying Kodak products. I wish I had the means to increase demand single-handedly, just to ensure a supply for me into the future. I'm definitely not going to quit using Kodak while it is available. That would just be stupid, IMHO. If and when they do have to stop production of the products I prefer to use, I will personally slap (hard) anyone who says, "I quit using Kodak years ago because I knew that would happen."

Rats abandon sinking ships. I'm not a rat, running down a rope on a rainy day. I'm not calling anyone else a rat, but abandoning a company despite their fine products purely out of spite doesn't seem the most rational move. And trying to drum up support against a struggling photographic supply company on a website dedicated to photography does seem like ignorant and senseless behavior. There aren't that many companies left that we can afford to lose another. Even if you don't use their products, you can't ignore the fact that if Kodak stopped supporting film and wet printing, every other company (and their investors) still in the film photography business would question their own involvement. Ilford could happily replace their B&W business with a focus purely on electronic printing, I'm sure. Their investors would be happy to spend whatever proceeds come from the sale of film-related assets.

What's next? Boycott Cosina - they stopped making your favorite model? Boycott Leica, they don't just make film cameras anymore? Boycott Zeiss, the Ikon isn't more expensive than an M7 and/or might draw sales away from Cosina? At what point do rational adults stop acting out of spite?
 
Pherdinand said:
40oz.. are you callin'us rats?? 😀
Click to expand...

lol no 🙂

There is nothing wrong with using whatever brands you feel make the best product. But to stop using Kodak simply out of spite just hastens the demise of what should be a valued resource. It sends entirely the wrong message. I'm sure as long as Hollywood shoots on 35mm, there will be enough Tri-X to go around. But the idea that we should all kill off a company at the first sign of a changing market is just bizarre.
 
My reason for no longer using Kodak products is a practical one.
I believe that Kodak will soon discontinue sale of B&W supplies entirely, developers included.

Kodak is abandoning B&W . The Kodak medical imaging business, which Kodak just sold, as a recent example, was (mainly) a large commercial/industrial scale B&W business supporting a substantial level of film and chemicals manufacture and manufacturing expertise. This being gone now will make B&W even less interesting to Kodak management.

I'll need other sources of B&W materials and have chosen to use the new sources sooner rather than later. This is particularly true of the Neopan 400 in D-76, a combination which I've not used before and with which I'd like to gain a working familiarity. There was no choice about the change to a different supplier of B&W paper; Kodak won't sell it to us anymore.

It is vastly cheaper, BTW, to home-formulate developers and fixers; my fixer costs about $2/gallon (a bit less actually) and the developers about 15-20% of the Kodak gallon package price. There is the additional advantage that developers are fresh as I make up small quantities (one liter) as I need them.
 
Last edited:
Pherdinand said:
Graybeard, don't you have problems loading 35mm fuji neopan 400 film onto a reel? I found it terrible and i have heard that i'm not the only one.
Click to expand...


No probem at all - I'm using Nikor stainless stell reels, 36 exposure. I've loaded about 100 rolls so far without any partucular problems. You already know that the Nikor reels should be bone dry before you try to load them.
 
Polymax RC was very nice paper, but I too can live without it.

HC110 is another story though.
I hope Kodak (or someone else) keeps making it...

Chris
 
ChrisPlatt said:
Polymax RC was very nice paper, but I too can live without it.

HC110 is another story though.
I hope Kodak (or someone else) keeps making it...

Chris
Click to expand...


HC-110 will present a real problem for those seeking to formulate their own equivalent.

The principal developing agent in HC-110 is a proprietary addition product (see the HC-110 patent) manufactured by or for Kodak and isn't generally available. This is different from other popular developers such as D-76 or Xtol where the essential components are readily available in the relatively small quantities useful for an individual darkroom.
 
I recently came accross two interesting books entitled "Darkroom" and "Darkroom 2" published by Lustrum Press in 1977 and 1978 respectively. Each of the books contain a series of articles written by accomplished photographers with regard to their darkroom practices.

There was one common thread throughout the articles that really struck me. In just about everyone of the artcles the author bemoaned the loss of of some paper or chemical that was no longer made due to the advent of inexpensive color film and processing. Several of the authors stated a fear that they would soon no longer be able to use black and white materials as they would no longer be available.

It's interesting that now, thirty years later, the same kind of comments are being made, only the culprit is digital rather than cheap color materials. Make what you will of this. I guess the old adage that "the more things change, the more things remain the same" applies.
 
Congratulations on the Focomat. A IIc would nicely replace my Durst M601 and 609.

The passing of the Kodak Era occurred during the Fall of 06. It's Ilford Multigrade IV RC and Warmtone RC from here forward. I'm also using Ilford Multigrade paper developer along with Formulary TP-4 rapid fixer.

The Great Yellow Father isn't as great as it used to be.
 
Graybeard said:
...It may be in the best interests of everyone seriously engaged in B&W work that Kodak has left the scene. This will allow the little guys (Ilford, Forte, Agfa sucessors, and others) to thrive with the somewhat smaller demand for B&W materials ...
Graybeard
Click to expand...
I had the same thought myself when Kodak announced that it was bowing out of silver based photography - less competition for the remaining firms that are committed to B&W photography.

Even though Kodak made my favorite film, I'd been using Ilford exclusively for some time, because I believe that they actually want to continue to be part of traditional B&W photography. .
 
I don't care for Kodak, but man will I cry the day Plus-X won't be available anymore. That film is magical IMO.
 
NB23 said:
I don't care for Kodak, but man will I cry the day Plus-X won't be available anymore. That film is magical IMO.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. Only Plus-X & HC-110...

I'm shifting over to Foma for all of my needs.

William
 
Graybeard said:
HC-110 will present a real problem for those seeking to formulate their own equivalent.

The principal developing agent in HC-110 is a proprietary addition product (see the HC-110 patent) manufactured by or for Kodak and isn't generally available. This is different from other popular developers such as D-76 or Xtol where the essential components are readily available in the relatively small quantities useful for an individual darkroom.
Click to expand...

Are these 'recipes' for developers readily available.

Brian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom