Two New Kodak Films in 2021?

@dourbalstar: Thanks for that bit of intel. I have a roll of Berlin Kino kicking around the house somewhere and haven't shot it. I may order some of that and Potsdam and give them a whirl.

@Corran: Different strokes... I love Plus-X for the mid-tones, and it was easy to shoot at 320 and develop in Diafine with very good results. When it was discontinued, I searched for a suitable replacement, and tried FP4+ and Foma 200. Both are OK, but neither has what I liked about Plus-X. I do shoot TMax (both 100 and 400) but it's an entirely different beast. I probably shoot TMax 400 more than any other film these days, but there are some situations where I prefer the tonality and grain of Plus-X.
 
FWIW I always preferred Verichrome Pan to Plus-X but it's academic;
Kodak isn't likely to market a competitor to an existing TMax product.

Chris
 
Corran said:
I'll never understand the nostalgic love for Plus-X.
Click to expand...

Tonality. People always talk about and look at grain and sharpness but tonality is most important in B&W. TMX and FP4+ have tonality nothing like Plus-X. Tonality is, however, a lot less important if you scan because you can push the curve around in post processing. Not many people wet print anymore.

Marty
 
Well I wet print and don't think Plus-X had anything special wrt to "tonality." I invite you to post identical photographs made with PX and other films that show some vast difference in "tonality."
 
Corran said:
Well I wet print and don't think Plus-X had anything special wrt to "tonality." I invite you to post identical photographs made with PX and other films that show some vast difference in "tonality."
Click to expand...

On it.

(10 characters).

Marty
 
ChrisPlatt said:
FWIW I always preferred Verichrome Pan to Plus-X but it's academic;
Kodak isn't likely to market a competitor to an existing TMax product.

Chris
Click to expand...

That is what was implied, but they seem to be ok marketing Tri-X and Tmax 400. I guess Tri-X has too big a following to disappoint.
 
I was hoping for Plus-X too. Exposed in good light it had the most pleasing contrast, with luminous whites and solid blacks. TMax 100 is the closest to a replacement but you have to absolutely nail exposure and development whereas Plus-X was much more forgiving and hence suitable for use in unmetered cameras or on the fly. I do hope Alaris reconsiders at some point.

As for what's in the wings, my guess is Kodak HIE. People were spending silly money for remaining stock so Alaris may price it very aggressively. Thinking along the same lines perhaps they could also resurrect a Tungsten balanced film to compete with Cinestill 800.

.
 
telenous said:
I was hoping for Plus-X too. Exposed in good light it had the most pleasing contrast, with luminous whites and solid blacks. TMax 100 is the closest to a replacement but you have to absolutely nail exposure and development whereas Plus-X was much more forgiving and hence suitable for use in unmetered cameras or on the fly. I do hope Alaris reconsiders at some point.

As for what's in the wings, my guess is Kodak HIE. People were spending silly money for remaining stock so Alaris may price it very aggressively. Thinking along the same lines perhaps they could also resurrect a Tungsten balanced film to compete with Cinestill 800.

.
Click to expand...

I would like to shoot some HIE. I could see that being a really good seller. I would buy Plus-X also.
 
markjwyatt said:
I would like to shoot some HIE. I could see that being a really good seller. I would buy Plus-X also.
Click to expand...

Back when HIE was available I remember seeing entire bodies of work based on the infrared look. I don't have a use for it right now but anything that expands our film options is good. As for Plus-X I hope Alaris is listening. Lots of erstwhile users are pining for it. I've never once seen anyone express that kind of feeling for Tmax 100. :D Not that it's a bad film, far from it.
 
telenous said:
Thinking along the same lines perhaps they could also resurrect a Tungsten balanced film to compete with Cinestill 800.
Click to expand...

CineStill 800T is Kodak film, doesn't need to be resurrected. It's Kodak VISION3 500T with the Remjet anti-halation backing removed, so that it can safely be (cross) processed by labs using C-41.
 
dourbalistar said:
CineStill 800T is Kodak film, doesn't need to be resurrected. It's Kodak VISION3 500T with the Remjet anti-halation backing removed, so that it can safely be (cross) processed by labs using C-41.
Click to expand...

That's right, I'd forgotten. It's the film stock for cinema use, right? Alaris may still produce the selfsame without the remjet backing, straight for still camera use. That will undercut the middleman and bring them a pretty penny. Cinestill retails for a staggering €20 p.r. around here.
 
telenous said:
That's right, I'd forgotten. It's the film stock for cinema use, right? Alaris may still produce the selfsame without the remjet backing, straight for still camera use. That will undercut the middleman and bring them a pretty penny. Cinestill retails for a staggering €20 p.r. around here.
Click to expand...

Yes, Kodak motion picture film:
https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/product/camera-films/500t-5219-7219

Cinestill takes the film, removes the Remjet, and re-packages/re-brands it. Basically, you're paying for convenience. Of course, one could buy 400-feet of film direct from Kodak, spool it down, and remove the Remjet yourself.
 
Bingley said:
@dourbalistar: Thanks for that bit of intel. I have a roll of Berlin Kino kicking around the house somewhere and haven't shot it. I may order some of that and Potsdam and give them a whirl.
Click to expand...

@Bingley, check the sprocket holes. If they're the rounded type, that's a pretty good clue that it was originally cine film. I've never tried the Lomo stuff, but I have tried ORWO N74+. The Lomo Berlin examples I've seen look very similar to my results. I think the grain structure has pretty distinctive "salt and pepper" look, and I found ORWO N74+ to be a bit more grainy compared to other 400 speed emulsions. If you like a bit of grit, then it'll be right up your alley, but it's no T-MAX 400. ;)

You could compare your results from the Lomo Berlin to some of the images in this thread here on the forum:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112206
 
markjwyatt said:
He said specifically there are no plans for Plus-X...
Click to expand...

Takkun said:
I skimmed the video and didn't catch that. There goes both my guesses (see my edit above)... Interesting mention of Gold in 120...
Click to expand...

markjwyatt said:
When asked about Plus-X, he (the Kodak Alaris rep.) specifically pointed to TMax 100 as today's improved Plus-X. He then said there are no immediate plans to re-introduce Plus-X, but that he could not rule it out forever.
Click to expand...

Some timestamps from the Silvergrain Classics chat:

Possible products for 2021 (reviving one old product, perhaps a new product):
https://youtu.be/nwdwdcOG4QU?t=1934

On reviving Plus-X (no current plans...):
https://youtu.be/nwdwdcOG4QU?t=2102

On consumer grade 120, such as Gold in 120 (didn't say no, didn't say yes...)
https://youtu.be/nwdwdcOG4QU?t=2253
 
Bingley said:
Fingers crossed one of the films brought back is Plus-X. That would be awesome! I only have a few rolls left in my fridge, and it remains a favorite for an old school/1950s look.
Click to expand...
If that kind of "revival" Plus-X was of the same quality as the current Tri-X, which is now a genuine lemon, prepare yourself to shout a big meh. :p

I have a real Plus-X 135-36 from the 1980's stored in my freezer, I am speculating till somebody from the Far East buys it from me for a grand. :D
 
I shot a lot of Plus-X and I do miss it but what I miss most of all is the old Tri-X. Please bring that back and if somehow they could make it grainier I would be buying lots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom