p.2 #1 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
I think the problem is not so much Eastman-Kodak but the additional middleman, Alaris. But this price drop is a good sign no matter how you look at it.
I can't help but compare the situation to buying Ektachrome Motion Picture film in bulk, directly from Eastman-Kodak--which results in a base cost of about $7.00 per 36 exposures. Similar for Double-XX and so on. Yet retailers, who have no choice but to buy from Alaris, are selling Ektachrome for a minimum of $20 a roll. The manufacturing costs have risen no doubt, but the retail prices (for still film) are beyond reason. People are not stupid. They see an extra markup that is not doing anything except enrich a middleman that provides no additional value to the customer. I believe Ektachrome would not be more than about $14 for 36 exposures if Kodak were distributing it themselves. Tri-X, with the 30% drop, is now more in line with that.
A couple years ago, I would have bought 10 rolls of Tri-X without a second thought. Even though it was a couple dollars more than HP5. At $12-$14, I'm not buying any, instead going for alternatives like Fomapan, Kentmere or Ilford. I'm sure they are well aware of this simple equation and have noticed a drop in sales where there have been only increases in the years' previous.
Has anyone heard any news about the pending sale/transfer of Alaris' film distributing business? It really should go back to Kodak. We don't need any more re-branders in this game, which is essentially what Alaris is, no different than Rollei, Lomo. Cinestill et al--except they are authorized to use Kodak's trademarks.
p.2 #3 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
So sad how prices are still rising—MPEX had portra 400 5 pack for less than 70 forever, all of a sudden in 2024 it's up to the same price as everyone else.
p.2 #4 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Just have to wait until local inventories run out and these new prices will be available in stores. Hoping they lower portra too. They overestimated their market and may have lost a lot of long term film shooters by these insane price hikes. Need to correct this price elasticity, portra should be 50 bucks 5 pack 120.
p.2 #5 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
A roll of Fomapan 400 in 120 is $4.89 at Freestyle right now, and a 100 ft roll of Fomapan 100 in 135 is $79.99.
It seems a classically formulated emulsion in most ways, and it’s not unfair to say that it “looks like Tri-x used to look.” https://bluemooncameracodex.com/film-fridays/fffomapan400
There’s no accounting for taste, and if you don’t like the look, you don’t like the look, and might not have liked original Tri-x either. But, it’s an option and I have been using it on and off for years, along with all the usual suspects, with “good results”, something which is always prone to be a personal opinion based on prejudices. Fomapan 100 in 4x5 also a more than decent option for those starting in LF photography and beyond.
Just throwing this out there as an option to cheer up the film price doomers.
I feel the same way about Kentmere 400. It is less than half the price of TriX and I easily like it as much. It has that classic what you would expect a film black and white image to look like. If you know what I mean!
Whoever controls the pricing at Kodak obviously bought into that greedflation thing. And tried to see how far they could push their prices. I've mentioned it before, but Iflord HP5 is a direct competitor, made in England by people being paid decent wages, imported to the USA, and way cheaper than TriX.
It doesn't take a genius to figure what is going on there.
p.2 #8 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
I should mention that Fomapan 400 in 135 can be pretty grainy, though useful if you want some kind of "bure, boke, that other thing" film noir look. I personally usually tend to gravitate to Fomapan 100 for 135.
p.2 #10 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
What are you developing your Fomapan with? Have you tried xtol?
Edward Teller wrote:
I should mention that Fomapan 400 in 135 can be pretty grainy, though useful if you want some kind of "bure, boke, that other thing" film noir look. I personally usually tend to gravitate to Fomapan 100 for 135.
p.2 #11 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Dm386 wrote:
What are you developing your Fomapan with? Have you tried xtol?
Sorry for the very late reply, I somehow missed my notification that this question had been asked.
The photo of the chairs was 135 film and was processed in XTOL 1:1 7:30 minutes at 20 degrees C, 30 seconds gentle inversions to start then 10 seconds per minute after that.
The crowd scene was 4x5 Fomapan 100 processed in Rodinal 1:50 7 minutes @ 20 degrees C, 30 seconds gentle agitation to start then 3 gentle inversions every minute after that.
p.2 #13 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
Trix has a unique spectral sensitivity and I find that I like it for that. But the amount of times that actually produces something better or more printable than Kentmere? Meh...
Also totally agree on Fomapan in 120. It makes me want one of those Fuji 645 point and shoots again.
p.2 #15 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
I seem to remember BH selling it for 9.99 prior to that 30% price cut announcement, which had us all hoping for 6.99 pricing. At that price I'd start buying it by the flats, but at 9.99 I'm not so enthusiastic.
p.2 #16 · Price cut on Tri-X 400 black and white film!
coralnut wrote:
I seem to remember BH selling it for 9.99 prior to that 30% price cut announcement, which had us all hoping for 6.99 pricing. At that price I'd start buying it by the flats, but at 9.99 I'm not so enthusiastic.
That $9.99 was after the price cut. It was $13 before.
Anyway, mpex now has it at $8.39 which is in the same ballpark as HP5 so it is now under my consideration again.
