View Full Version : $110 per box of 10 sheets 8x10 TMY2?
Daniel Stone
30-Jan-2015, 13:21
Anyone else see the Facebook update from Canham cameras for TMY-2? "Estimated" price is $110/box, so $11/sheet, plus shipping. Ouch...
I love TMY-2, but $11/sheet is getting into color film territory. And silver is down compared to some years ago, oil is waaay down, but are labor costs up THAT much?
Not complaining, I won't be buying, but just something I saw that boggled my mind.
-Dan
the yellow dye they use to make the boxes is at an all-time high. It's dandelion dust from iceland.
Old-N-Feeble
30-Jan-2015, 13:57
Hmm... I always thought it was Tinkerbell golden shower.
Ken Lee
30-Jan-2015, 14:14
What size ? :rolleyes:
John Kasaian
30-Jan-2015, 14:16
8x10 HP-5+ is a mere $4.40 a sheet at Badger Graphic. Not TMY2 but it can make some amazing images. and reciprocity is very good---not TMY2 great---but more than good enough if I do my part.
Peter Lewin
30-Jan-2015, 14:26
What size ? :rolleyes:
8x10. The impression I get from the Facebook page is that this is a custom run for Keith, which might explain the price. Since I only use 4x5 I don't know if Tmax 400 is available anywhere else in 8x10.
Boggles my mind too. I bought a ten year supply of it a few years ago at $6.20/sheet when Keith started selling it and B&H was still selling it. I'm spoiled enough with that supply I'm not willing to be a consumer of it for $11/sheet right now. (probably $12 after shipping)
It's good stuff and I enjoy using it, but with pyrocat hd, I can do pretty similar things with FP4+ sheet film if I don't need to deal with reciprocity.
Can't use the travel budget thing to rationalize it (film being the cheapest part of the adventure), as I use 90% of my film within walking distance of home.
Drew Wiley
30-Jan-2015, 15:00
Keith is normally spot on, or even a bit cheaper for the given point in history that Kodak is setting the cost basis for batch cutting. Fortunately, I have a good reserve in the freezer of 8x10 TMY, as well as TMX, both bought from Keith. But here's my take on value: with a high contrast scene and HP5, I have to resort to a second sheet of FP4 as an unsharp contrast mask to get as much control (crisp tonal gradation) in the extremes of the curve as I can print directly from TMY; so I don't really save any money or time. Now don't go quoting me all that compensating development nonsense, which compresses everything and sacrifices midtone tonality. I want my cake and to eat it too! TMY digs way down into the shadows much better than HP5 because it has a much straighter line down there. Now I'm certainly not dissing HP5. I've made many wonderful prints on it. But it does best in slightly lower contrast situations which I can use a bit of expansion during development to actually feature its wonderful midtone microtonality and edge effect. But if I need the most versatile fast film in 8x10, which can handle almost any situation, it would currently be TMY. This is especially important to me, because I might have only one or two b&w filmholders in my pack on a given day, the other one or two being dedicated to color film. At these kind of prices, I'm not a machine-gunner! But my worry is that Kodak will price themselves right off the map, and that we'll lose one of the best sheet films ever. Their current pricing on color 8x10 is almost triple for what I paid for the same film just
three years ago. But we'll see how this all actually turns out. Keith is a very reliable guy, and I don't think he makes much per box on these deals at all. He does
have volume industrial buyers of TMax. I'm not exactly sure who they are; but they obviously have more capital than me!
StoneNYC
30-Jan-2015, 22:07
At $170/20 sheet box of Acros100 (my price, it's even higher from Japan exposure or whatever it's called) it's 8.5 (plus $10 shipping puts it at $180 total) so really $9/sheet it's not that different, though still higher than Acros100, both are excellent and unique films with really no competition.
I shoot both, I hope I can save enough to go in on the next order for at least 2 boxes as I only have 2 boxes myself.
You get what you pay for, HP5+ is less than half the resolution of TMY-2, and prints made from 8x10 film that are big enough to notice the difference are a specialty product for very few people.
But when you want to make mural size prints and want the detail and need the speed that Acros100 doesn't have in wind etc, it's really what you need....
Keith is a good guy, he really tried for me with the 4x5 Eastman Double-X cutting fiasco that never came to fruition, he really does this for the film community, it's really kodak that sets the price.
HP5+ is less than half the resolution of TMY-2
You want to provide a source for that bold statement sir?
Anyone else see the Facebook update from Canham cameras for TMY-2? "Estimated" price is $110/box, so $11/sheet, plus shipping. Ouch...
I love TMY-2, but $11/sheet is getting into color film territory. And silver is down compared to some years ago, oil is waaay down, but are labor costs up THAT much?
Not complaining, I won't be buying, but just something I saw that boggled my mind.
-Dan
silver IS down, a few years ago it was 46$ (USD) / troy oz now 18.24$
tmy2 it is good stuff, but ilford, foma, adox, even photo paper is fine for me
i will let someone else tow the line and pay the lien.
Lachlan 717
31-Jan-2015, 01:05
You want to provide a source for that bold statement sir?
+1.
You want to provide a source for that bold statement sir?
Waiting for kodak to chime in here, I mean kodak is his only name.
You want to provide a source for that bold statement sir?
Probably is true when you use baking soda as a fixer.
David
StoneNYC
31-Jan-2015, 08:15
You want to provide a source for that bold statement sir?
Yea. My own optical prints... And it's well-documented that tabular grain is much fiber than traditional grain, it's also common understanding that TMY-2 is essentially as fine grained as Delta100, so extreme difference between that and HP5+ and don't get me wrong I love the stuff, I use it a lot, its been my number one 400 speed film (besides Neopan400 when I could snag it, but that's 120 not LF) so I know it's an excellent film.
John Kasaian
31-Jan-2015, 09:08
8x10 Kodak B&W film is all custom order stuff, IIRC, so I'd expect it's going to be co$tly.
Oren Grad
31-Jan-2015, 10:35
8x10 Kodak B&W film is all custom order stuff, IIRC, so I'd expect it's going to be co$tly.
It's hard to keep track of these things since Kodak Alaris doesn't announce them, but 8x10 TXP was made a stock item again recently. B&H lists it at $76.50 per box of 10, still quite pricey compared to HP5 Plus but not quite so breathtaking as the price Keith Canham needs to ask for a custom run of TMY.
Tin Can
31-Jan-2015, 10:54
Some of use got in on Keith CanHam's TMAX 400 order. Same ballpark. The 8x20 is $255.00 per box and the 11x14 is $225.00.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=832575866785029&id=131324393576850&fref=nf&pnref=story
I better make mine count.
StoneNYC
31-Jan-2015, 10:55
It's hard to keep track of these things since Kodak Alaris doesn't announce them, but 8x10 TXP was made a stock item again recently. B&H lists it at $76.50 per box of 10, still quite pricey compared to HP5 Plus but not quite so breathtaking as the price Keith Canham needs to ask for a custom run of TMY.
My understanding is that all 8x10 is custom ordered by Keith and anything sold by B&H is going to be stuff from the same order that Keith does, in other words B&H most likely buys in when Keith orders. This is my understanding not saying it's fact, but as I understand it all film cut bigger than 4x5 is a custom order and Keith is the only one who Kodak will deal with for custom orders.
Yea. My own optical prints... And it's well-documented that tabular grain is much fiber than traditional grain, it's also common understanding that TMY-2 is essentially as fine grained as Delta100, so extreme difference between that and HP5+ and don't get me wrong I love the stuff, I use it a lot, its been my number one 400 speed film (besides Neopan400 when I could snag it, but that's 120 not LF) so I know it's an excellent film.
My request stands...
Sorry but your statement is nonsense.
...both are excellent and unique films with really no competition.
I guess that is if you leave Delta 100 out and RPX 100 (or whatever Rollei / agfa is called now).
You get what you pay for, HP5+ is less than half the resolution of TMY-2, and prints made from 8x10 film that are big enough to notice the difference are a specialty product for very few people.
But when you want to make mural size prints and want the detail and need the speed that Acros100 doesn't have in wind etc, it's really what you need....
I am sorry to say, that is just not true.
For reference, i once had the chance to work on a "mural" size print from a negative of a great image. the image was so amazing (as was the print, i did not make), we hung it at the front of the shop behind the main counter. I cannot even remember how many times people walked buy an said, wow, it must have been a challenge to carry an 8X10 up that mountain, in south east asia, or what kind of lens was that shot with?, or i am sure that was some tech pan. The truth was that it was HP5+, 35mm, shot with a canon plastic 50mm 1.8. That print was 1X1.5 meters. I am sure others can attest to that capability.
Allowed/acceptable circles of confusion are all that matters in really large size prints. The LPM resolution of a film could not possible affect the visible resolution of a print, at any size, to a naked eye, not to mention, the resolution of the paper is the limiting factor here. If one takes a loupe to a mural size print, well, someone else can complete that sentence.
Andrew O'Neill
31-Jan-2015, 20:13
I love that film but will no longer shoot it in 8x10. 4x5 and roll film, yes. I'll stick with my main films, HP5 and FP4, and exotic, Rollei, and Xray.
StoneNYC
31-Jan-2015, 21:45
I guess that is if you leave Delta 100 out and RPX 100 (or whatever Rollei / agfa is called now).
I am sorry to say, that is just not true.
For reference, i once had the chance to work on a "mural" size print from a negative of a great image. the image was so amazing (as was the print, i did not make), we hung it at the front of the shop behind the main counter. I cannot even remember how many times people walked buy an said, wow, it must have been a challenge to carry an 8X10 up that mountain, in south east asia, or what kind of lens was that shot with?, or i am sure that was some tech pan. The truth was that it was HP5+, 35mm, shot with a canon plastic 50mm 1.8. That print was 1X1.5 meters. I am sure others can attest to that capability.
Allowed/acceptable circles of confusion are all that matters in really large size prints. The LPM resolution of a film could not possible affect the visible resolution of a print, at any size, to a naked eye, not to mention, the resolution of the paper is the limiting factor here. If one takes a loupe to a mural size print, well, someone else can complete that sentence.
I love Ilford, but Delta100 is not in the same league as TMY-2 or Acros100, the spectral response of Acros100 and the reciprocity characteristics of both set them in a different league (especially in LF when reciprocity often comes into play) than any other 100 or 400 speed film, I'm not just talking grain, I'm talking the overall package.
Also, as to your ridiculous story of your 35mm mural print made with a plastic lens, you can make a lot of beautiful images with smaller format films and blow them up as big as you want, but they're not going to have the same amount of detail, and I don't care what your customers might have thought about the print because it doesn't matter, the actual definition of the image was not the same as a 4x5 negative of the same size print or an 8x10 of the same size print. And arguing that point that "well my customers thought it was LF" is kind of like saying "at gas stations people who know nothing shoot cars see my Datsun 280ZX and think it's a Ferrari... Doesn't mean my car became a Ferrari or could drive as fast as a Ferrari or handle turns as well as a Ferrari, or sell athe prices a Ferrari would sell at... because... *drum roll*... it may look nice, and be good enough for the average person... but it's not a Ferrari....
Daniel Stone
31-Jan-2015, 21:58
Let's stay on track guys, please.
John Kasaian
31-Jan-2015, 22:39
I think it's good that people can get the stuff if they need it.
I can do just fine with more conventional emulsions and do the math if the reciprocity beast rears its ugly head.
StoneNYC
31-Jan-2015, 23:02
Let's stay on track guys, please.
What is the track exactly? I'm legitimately asking you, because the only question I saw was (paraphrased) "are manufacturing costs up that much?"
Well, apparently... Yes.
There's nothing else to say man, and you're not even buying it (and it appears that you're getting out of 8x10 by your sales recently but that's just speculation). So why bother asking? It's the kind of thread that has no real point or track except to stir people up and create a platform for an argument. If you were going to buy it, it would be pertinent to you...
"Not exactly a soup question now is it?" (Movie reference quote).
Daniel Stone
1-Feb-2015, 00:17
What is the track exactly? I'm legitimately asking you, because the only question I saw was (paraphrased) "are manufacturing costs up that much?"
Well, apparently... Yes.
There's nothing else to say man, and you're not even buying it (and it appears that you're getting out of 8x10 by your sales recently but that's just speculation). So why bother asking? It's the kind of thread that has no real point or track except to stir people up and create a platform for an argument. If you were going to buy it, it would be pertinent to you...
"Not exactly a soup question now is it?" (Movie reference quote).
I can ask whatever I want, just as you can. My exact reasoning doesn't have to be "justifiable" by everyone to be worth discussing.
And FYI, I WOULD be shooting Tmax 400 if it were more economical to do so compared to offerings from other mfg's that can get 95% 'there'. Which, in pretty much all cases, is fine for me(and seemingly a lot of others, which is unfortunate for Kodak to lose longstanding customers).
StoneNYC
1-Feb-2015, 00:41
I can ask whatever I want, just as you can. My exact reasoning doesn't have to be "justifiable" by everyone to be worth discussing.
And FYI, I WOULD be shooting Tmax 400 if it were more economical to do so compared to offerings from other mfg's that can get 95% 'there'. Which, in pretty much all cases, is fine for me(and seemingly a lot of others, which is unfortunate for Kodak to lose longstanding customers).
NOW that's a point :)
But there have been 100 "kodak is pricing themselves out" threads and again gains us all morning. BUT at least it's still an option. Better than no options...
...the spectral response...
...
Taija71A
1-Feb-2015, 09:56
Let's stay on track guys, please.
What is the track exactly?
__
'Uh-oh!'...
It looks like one 'Stone'... Is upset with the other 'Stone'. :)
_________
StoneNYC
1-Feb-2015, 11:13
__
'Uh-oh!'...
It looks like one 'Stone'... Is upset with the other 'Stone'. :)
_________
Haha!
Maybe it's because half the time people send me PM's and call me Daniel...
That's not actually why I would be upset but it is amazing how many messages I've gotten over the years addressed to Daniel lol!
Larry Kellogg
1-Feb-2015, 11:56
__
'Uh-oh!'...
It looks like one 'Stone'... Is upset with the other 'Stone'. :)
_________
Let's not leave any Stone unturned.
Jac@stafford.net
1-Feb-2015, 11:59
Let's not leave any Stone unturned.
Rather, leave no turn unstoned.
AlexGard
8-Feb-2015, 02:41
Rather, leave no turn unstoned.
That is one of my favourite Shpongle songs
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U09xs0-bAGo
Larry Kellogg
8-Feb-2015, 02:56
I don't know what it means to leave no turn unstoned, it just makes no sense to me. Leaving no stone unturned connects to the physical, the other phrase, well, is a mystery to me,
The song did not help, LOL, even though I read the lyrics, which seem to indicate the meaning of a search that does not leave any stone unturned.
AlexGard
8-Feb-2015, 20:00
I think it might also be hinting at taking no direction without being inebriated
Drew Wiley
10-Feb-2015, 12:59
How these respective films look under a high-powered loupe and how they actually render detail in a print are two different things. And it depends on your developer. I bought into that whole "watercolor" grain thing of HP5+ with pyro stain, and successfully ran with it quite awhile. Under a loupe, the grain is pretty mushy; but in print there tends be exceptionally good edge acutance, so the prints come out looking very crisp, at least from my 8x10 negs printed to typical 16x20 or 20x24 size; in other words, up to 3x enlargement or so. Doing prints that size from 4x5 HP5 does reveal a minor bit of mush. TMY-2 is a very different animal, with a different look in print and a very different characteristic curve. These are distinctions which I consider far more important than nominal fineness of grain, at least for sheet film work. Sometimes a finer-grained film actually looks less sharp in print. There are lots of variables, and I'd hate to lose either of
these excellent films.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.