Will Tri-X Be Eliminated?

[Poptart]

For half a century, black-and-white artists have chosen KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X Film with confidence, knowing its pushability provides an extra stop when you need it. In challenging lighting situations, the film’s wide exposure latitude is very forgiving. And its distinctive grain structure adds realism, while an edge of contrast brings drama to your images.

from the Kodak website

 

[rover]

So the answer is no?

 

[TimF]

Hope so. (that's in response to rover BTW, not the thread title!)

PS why does the forum not allow posts shorter than 10 characters? Weird.

 

[Skinny McGee]

PS why does the forum not allow posts shorter than 10 characters? Weird.[/QUOTE]

They want us to learn bigger words 😉

 

[wlewisiii]

I would bet that Tri-X will be around for awhile. Despite Kodak management's demonstrated lack of competence, they did recently spend a whole lot of money updating the B&W film plant. Even if they were stupid enough to decide they didn't need the income, there would be many others offering to buy the only wholy modern B&W film plant in the world. The paper facility needed a similar level of investment - and that's why Kodak chose to shut it down instead. However the film plant has already had the investment, so it's actually in the company's best interest (ie the bottom line) to keep it running and generating revenue as long as possible.

Given those bits, I expect that Kodak to be producing at least some B&W film for quite a while yet. I'm still trying various Ilford, Foma & etc films however...

William

 

[photodog]

Here's a photo of the box my latest roll of bulk film came in. Kodak still calls it Tri-X but the development time is different.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Errr...that "new" development time has been "new" for a few years now. I take it last roll you developed had the "old" look? That was, like, so last century

 

[david b]

Stop worrying about this and start buying HP5+.

Support a company that wants to support you: Ilford.

 

[Dave H]

david b's got it right, I done blind tests on myself using tri-x and HP5+ and either couldn't tell the difference in most instances or the differences were very slight. I used to use the Holy Trinity of Tri-x, D76 and Leica, but, now only one of the three is still on the go. I hope Tri-x survives because I feel the same about it as I about Ilford, but on balance, david b's comments ring in my ears.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I'm sorry, but this is why film is slowly dying. There are some very definite differences between HP5+ and Tri-X. Their response to the same developer is not the same, their grain is not exactly the same. They are comparable, true, but one is not a substitute for the other.

You cannot get the same kind of look and grain developing HP5+ in Rodinal or Diafine as you would Tri-X in those developers, for example. Different bite, different grain, different feel.

 

[Poptart]

Different panache.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

And how... http://www.saladeprensa.org/danzante.jpg

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I know! Somehow we got into panaches... 😉 (I'm being a smart-alec)

 

[david b]

SO switching film brands is killing film?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

SO switching film brands is killing film?

Yes, that's it David, you hit it right in the nail. I've been killing film for a long time. 🙄

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Stop worrying about this and start buying HP5+

Not caring is killing film. (oh, no...barrage and derail of semantics in the future sees I)

 

[skipc]

Not caring is killing film.

Not buying is killing film...skip

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

If you don't care, you don't buy (ergo). I agree.

 

[david b]

I concur. That is why I have recently purchased large quantities of paper and film.

 

[Dave H]

You cannot get the same kind of look and grain developing HP5+ in Rodinal or Diafine as you would Tri-X in those developers, for example. Different bite, different grain, different feel.

I agree, but I seldom use Rodinal, but i would use Tri-x with it, and I've never seen anywhere in the UK mail order or otherwise to buy Diafine. So, HP5+ its going to be.