Decimated sheet film makers

[ditkoofseppala]

Trying to get back into LF photography after a 40-year hiatus has its traumatic moments. Surveying the sheet film scene is one example. How many soldiers will be left standing after the digital/analog battle dies down? Both in terms of the makers, and the available emulsions. Eastman Kodak is "rationalising". Ilford apparently hived its analog photo-emulsion and chemicals biz into a specialist division, which is now gobbling up minor makers (Kentmere, e.g.). A small corps of unfamiliar eastern-European companies now make film; I see the venerable Adox name has been resuscitated by one of them.

A lot of Googling has given me a little illumination plus a large measure of confusion. I never used to think about these things much; I just walked into my neighbourhood photo shop and bought a box or two of the wide variety of Kodak sheet film emulsions; I bought some Agfa film for 35mm and rollfilm cameras.

I hear the newer Kodak tabular-grain emulsions are pretty unforgiving about processing, and not everyone is in love with their gradation. I'd rather stick with more traditional materials, but I'm not even sure which of the names I see in these forums are still producing -- a lot of film seems to come out of the deepfreeze these days rather than off the dealers' shelves. I heard Forte (a name I don't remember from my youth) is "defunct," for example.

Could some kind soul outline what IS currently available? Particularly along the line of slower emulsions? I never had much use for Tri-X and HP-5 in LF; always thought those were for the handheld camera crew. I have a lot of barrel-mount lenses, so slow emulsions make life easier when you're using your hat or a Galli shutter to measure exposure!

I never had a lot of luck with Ilford, either; always preferred Kodak. I think I have a fair idea of what both makers have just now (Ilford: FP4+, HP5+, Delta Pro 100, Commercial Ortho. Kodak: TMax 100, TMax 400, Tri-X.) So could somebody give me a good survey of the minor makers and what they have available in 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10?

Chemistry . . . but that's worth another separate thread. I'm glad D-76 and Rodinal have survived, anyway. :(

[Terence McDonagh]

I'd say your best bet is to look at B&H's, Freestyle's and Badger Graphic's websites. Between the three, I believe they have just about everything available in the U.S.

[John Bowen]

What you haven't inquired about are the manufacturer's Quality Control. I would suggest you stick with Kodak, Ilford or Fuji if you value quality control in your films. Many of the other manufacturers have had QC issues reported......this probably relates to the 50+ year old equipment they use.

Just my 2 Cents

[Christopher Breitenstein]

Welcome back!

Go with either Freestyle or B&H. Personally, I use freestyle. The transit time living in AZ is about two days. Their prices on 8x10 film are a little higher, but I think its worth it for many reasons.

To be honest, I would say one or two companies will be producing Lf film in 15-20 years, if we are lucky. I still fell this is very optimistic. I just hope it dosn't go belly up before I have the financial capacity to buy a life-times worth.

Im 22 and have never known the 'local camera shop.' The closest thing I have ever had is a Ritz, and the local pawn shop that occasionally got some equipment. I have found the places to pick up used equipment are this forum, Keh.com, Mpex.com (midwest photo exchange), and finally Ebay. For new gear I would go to Frestyle, B&H, or Badger Graphic. If you are looking for something really specific (a certain light meter, Size of dark cloth, shutter calibration, etc...), ask on the forum, because their are several individuals running home businesses that produce wonderful gear and provide the best of service.

With all the companies going under their is a glimmer of hope. It seems for every company that closes it's doors another, usually in eastern Europe or Russia, opens. Fotokemika is one of these, and in my opinion their paper is quite good. In addition their are all sorts of startup magazines who are looking for artists to cover their pages w/. Not to mention the trmendous effort being put forward by Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee. Who have established an amazing publishing company, The Lodima Press, and are working on a replacement for kodak Azo.

Things are not all all bad, but I know film based processes will all but disappear in my lifetime.

Yours;

[Christopher Breitenstein]

What you haven't inquired about are the manufacturer's Quality Control. I would suggest you stick with Kodak, Ilford or Fuji if you value quality control in your films. Many of the other manufacturers have had QC issues reported......this probably relates to the 50+ year old equipment they use.

Just my 2 Cents

I second this.

[Christopher Breitenstein]

Chemistry . . . but that's worth another separate thread. I'm glad D-76 and Rodinal have survived, anyway. :(

I make all my own developers, and buy the ingredients in large quntities from chemical supply houses. But nearly all the developing agents must be ordered through a specialty retailer. I do this because nobody makes ansco 130 paper developer, or ABC Pyro for film. Their are still several companies producing chemistry, but a lot of them are rather obscure.

[Bill_1856]

I nobody makes ansco 130 paper developer, or ABC Pyro for film. .

Is Photograpy Formulary now out of business too?

[ditkoofseppala]

Well, I've worked my way through Badger and Freestyle (having done Adorama earlier), will check B&H next. My heart sank when I saw how little Badger had to offer. Freestyle had a LOT more.

I'm sure quality control in small eastern-European firms will be more of an issue than it is with Kodak and Ilford. The question is, just HOW bad is it? I saw the thread about the mis-sized Bergger 4x5 stuff; presumably the retailers will take it back and get on the distributor's case, and so on back up the line. It used to be considered good practice, anyway (once upon a time) to buy in bulk and run tests on each new emulsion number just to be sure. I'm sure that would be essential now with the small firms.

I note the "Arista EDU Ultra" films, priced about half what the others cost. Has anyone tried these, and if so, just HOW bad are they? :p And how about Adox, Efke, Foma and Bergger? As I said, I like SLOW emulsions, and they just aren't available any more from the remaining Big Two.

And Christopher, the next 15 or 20 years are probably all I've got left anyway! After that, it's YOUR problem! :p But you never can tell! The situation may stabilise, or the pendulum might even swing back a bit, as it presently appears to be doing. Small companies are no bad thing. If analog photography remains firmly established as a dependable niche market, smaller companies will be interested in supplying it. And small companies tend to be more responsive to the wishes of their customers. So life may not be that bad for you youngsters. Just as a reminder of the unpredictability of life, remember that half a century or so ago, somebody estimated that the total market for computers might be 5 or 6 machines! Somebody made a collection of dumb categorical statements and predictions in that field, and it sure makes funny reading today. There's simply no knowing what the next fifty years will bring. :D

[cyrus]

Is Photograpy Formulary now out of business too?

Nope!

[David Karp]

I have never tried it, but lots of people like Arista.edu Ultra. It is the same as Fomapan.

[John Kasaian]

IMHO you can't go wrong with TXP or FP-4+, though if you're bent on "slow" and "kodak" then you have a choice of TMX or.....TMX. I don't know how TMX compares with it's faster sister TMY, but TMY is really quite nice to work with. IIRC, John Sexton has written extensively on TMX and he certainly does fine work with it so you might want to check into what he advocates. If you really want slow, you might look into Efke 25 (the panchro, not the ortho version.)

Cheers!

[roteague]

Fuji still makes Velvia ... enough said.

[rls]

As I said, I like SLOW emulsions, and they just aren't available any more from the remaining Big Two.

Don't forget ND filters! I use them often with my lenses in barrel.

I know that Ilford's FP4 and HP5 make different negatives, but either can be slowed down.

Cheers, R

[Christopher Breitenstein]

Is Photograpy Formulary now out of business too?

No.

The last time I checked the Formulary they didn't carry either of these developers, I'm pretty sure. I just checked again and they have started carrying ABC Pyro, and "Formulary 130" not sure if this is ansco 130 though.

[tim atherton]

Ilford Delta 100 is actually a very nice film - many find it preferable to TMAX 100

Quality control does seem a bit of a problem with some of the other films, but I've also had a lot of luck with Efke 100, but YMMV...

[Skorzen]

I note the "Arista EDU Ultra" films, priced about half what the others cost. Has anyone tried these, and if so, just HOW bad are they? :p And how about Adox, Efke, Foma and Bergger? As I said, I like SLOW emulsions, and they just aren't available any more from the remaining Big Two.


My experience has been that the Arista films are not bad at all. And as others have said it is Fomapan. I just shot a few sheets of Efke 50 and found that I quite like the look (semi stand developed in Rodinal)

[David A. Goldfarb]

Adox/Efke (same film, different branding) 100 is a nice film, if you like the look of a traditional film. I've used quite a lot of it, and haven't had problems, but some people have had uneven coating problems with some boxes. It is a softer emulsion than what you'll get from Kodak or Ilford, so it requires more careful handling. If you want this kind of look, but want to play it safe, then go with Ilford FP4+.

Efke 25 and 50 have a different spectral sensitivity (closer to an ortho film, but not so close that you could process it with a red safelight), which isn't really to my taste, but some people like them.

[j.e.simmons]

Is Photograpy Formulary now out of business too?

It's Photographers Formulary (http://www.photoformulary.com/DesktopDefault.aspx).
juan

[Joseph O'Neil]

What is being described is a trend across all retail. If you look very carefully at stock in *any* retail store, you will see the stock is "wide but not deep".

by that I mean, you will find maybe 50 or 100 copies of the latest Stephen King novel, but very little outside of the "top 100" best sellers, however that list is gaged.

Large format is a specialty item, and you have to go to specilaty item suppliers. Period. Before anyone gets paranoid, try this list below for fun:
- amateur astronomy & telescopes;
- rock polishing;
- diving (scuba & snorkeling);
- quilting;
- fine woodworking;
- antique car restoration;

The list goes on and on and on. I am quite sure many of you can add more of your own. My point is this - how many supplies and raw materials for any of these activities can or do you find at your local Wal-Mart? I have a hellva a time trying to find blank glass slides for my microscope anymore.

The so called recession we are all hearing about has likely hit us 2 or 3 years ago, or more. In the past few years, stock at store shelves everywhere you go has shrunk in terms of width and overall variety. Anything out of the ordinary you have to special order in, or use a specialty store, usually on-line anymore. It's not just large format photography, far, far from it.

Two last thoughts. First, I bought new Nikon D40 DSLR. I tried several different outlet, and even at one point B&H was out of stock of both spare EL-9 batteries and the special AC adaptor for that camera.

So there you go - brand new state of the art digital SLR, and I cannot buy a spare battery for it, but I can buy sheet film. Film is dead eh? I call bull***t on that one. :)
(Just for the record, batteries america had plenty of spare OEM batteries in stock for my camera)

Point two - the "big story" on the TV news last night, one i've been reading about a lot lately - the return of records - LPs and singles. In fact, the sales of singles in vinyl in the UK is predicted to surpass single CD sales next year. Not that single CDs ever sold much to begin with, but the point is, we all saw single sales off itunes surpassing single CDs, but who ever saw single vinyl records outselling the single CD?

I think we should have a new forum on this board - Doom & Gloom. Everybody who wants to rant and rave about the "death of film" can go there...and stay there. :)

joe

[Clyde Rogers]

No.

The last time I checked the Formulary they didn't carry either of these developers, I'm pretty sure. I just checked again and they have started carrying ABC Pyro, and "Formulary 130" not sure if this is ansco 130 though.

Formulary 130 is indeed Ansco 130. I've used it for seven or eight years now, and like it quite a bit.

--clyde

[Scott Davis]

The Arista.EDU Ultra (particularly in the 200 speed) has become my standard film. It is terrific for processing in Pyro (I use Pyrocat HD), and printing in platinum. I don't know if it would work well for salt or albumen prints, but for platinum and silver it works great. I have not experienced any quality control issues, and I've shot several hundred sheets of it in 5x7 over the span of perhaps 2 years now, covering multiple emulsion lots.

[Toyon]

Your post borders on panic - populated with inflammatory terms like, "traumatic, dies, soldier, corps, battle, unforgiving, left standing, gobbling etc.." Furthermore, for someone who has been out of LF for 40 years, you make some un-useful assumptions. For example: "I never had a lot of luck with Ilford," and, "tabular grain films are unforgiving". In reality, your experience with Ilford 40 years ago is mostly irrelevant, as their emulsion range has almost completely changed since that time. In addition, if tabular films were really as difficult as you assume, they would not be so popular. They just require consistent processing techniques. There is virtually no significant industry in the world that has the same players or product line that was around 40, or even 20 years ago. That said, there are lots of good emulsions around, from both the large manufacturers and small ones. For slow speed work, I like Efke 25, and the quality control issues are pretty minor, in my experience. TMax400 is a terrific film that we are lucky to have.

[BradS]

Kodak Tri-X (320TXP) is still readily available in both 4x5 and 5x7 at reasonable prices so, I am happy. The rest (Kodak Tmax, Fuji, Ilford, Efke/Adox and Foma) is just so much frosting on the cake. Seems to me, things are good.

[ditkoofseppala]

Well, this thread has yielded some information that is useful to me, at least. I'm encouraged enough to give the Arista EDU and the Efke emulsions a serious try. Also it's good news to hear that Ilford has pulled up its socks. :)

Sorry you reacted so strongly to the rhetoric, Toyon -- to each his own. And Joe, for the record, I don't subscribe to the TEOTWAWKI view of things. As I said to Chris, the pendulum has a way of swinging to and fro, as was pointed out regarding vinyl records. New technology has a way of displacing old technology -- for awhile, until the limitations of the new become apparant against the strengths of the old. Then each eventually assumes its proper place in the scheme of things. "Horses for courses," as they say. I happily use my D200 with its low-image-quality superzoom for photographing my sleddogs -- it's just the thing, because they never stop moving and I have to trash 20 images for each one that's halfway satisfactory. It costs me next to nothing either financially or emotionally to trash a digital file; I used to spend a fortune on film and unwanted prints just keeping record photos of my dogs. But that D200 is not the camera I would use to produce an exhibition-quality landscape print to hang on the wall in my study. Mind you, I've seen some incredible coffee-table-book work, digitally stitched panorama photos of "spectacular" landscape country, but to me the colours are garish and unreal, none of it looks like the real world to me. OK if you like photographic fantasy, I guess, but I'm more interested in photography as a reflection of reality. (A bit off the point!)

Anyway, I don't see the demise of silver-based imaging anytime soon. We're going through a rough adjustment phase just now; we may already be through the worst of it, or not. Kodak may get out of the silver biz altogether; who knows what decisions will be made by its CEO and board. Big corporations are not known either for responsiveness to their customer base or for intelligent decision-making. (Just look at Bill Gates; he's good at making money, but he is not good at making good computers or good software. If you want a great machine for graphic arts, it had better be from Apple.) So T-Max and Tri-X may or may not be around for much longer. But if Kodak goes, some smaller company will produce something similar -- assuming that the license to make it is for sale. If not, so what! Photographers have always made their best images independent of what materials were or were not available at the time. Many of those iconic, never-to-be-forgotten images for LF folks were created before Tri-X even existed, virtually ALL of them long before T-Max.

It's really good news that something as reasonably priced as Arista EDU is available and appears to give good results for some users. I think there's enough variety out there to keep me busy for a long time. It was always better to get to know ONE emulsion thoroughly rather than constantly switching films; it takes a long time really to know the characteristics and potential of a single film, to work out the best developer and processing times for one's personal tastes and way of working, etc.

Thanks for the info, guys! :D

[Pat Kearns]

I consider you to be very lucky indeed to be able to walk into your local camera store and be able to buy any sheet film. My local fifty thousand square foot "Imaging Center" has put all of the film and darkroom chemicals on 6 shelves in the corner. If it is not 35 mm Fujicolor film then you're SOL. All of my film and chemicals come from B&H. Tmax films are excellent films. As John K. mentioned earlier, John Sexton has produced excellent prints with it. Sexton has spoken of his methods with this film and on the LF Homepage you can find an article with his methods. It was an excellent starting point for me and with some testing I know how to expose and develop the film. The grain structure is finer than anything I've seen. In fact, I have had difficulty trying to find grain to focus when using a 30x micro-sight with Tmax 100. So, I say, do your research on what is out there and where to buy it. Then, whatever your choice is, buy it, test it and enjoy it.

[ditkoofseppala]

I consider you to be very lucky indeed to be able to walk into your local camera store and be able to buy any sheet film.

That was forty years ago! Now ALL the photo shops are staffed by teenage idiots who don't even know that much about the digital stuff they are pushing, but who aggressively and confidently tell you all sorts of ridiculous things, generally the exact reverse of what's actually the case, and who seem unaware that film even exists!

Nope, it's a question of researching what's out there, which is what I'm trying to do, and placing an order from a great distance -- probably from a US firm, and hoping that the stuff doesn't get ruined when Canada Customs inspects it. That was part of my point -- no friendly neighbourhood photo shop any more, and everything I would want for LF must be ordered from afar.

[BradS]

http://www.bigcameraworkshops.com in Canada sells film. Rob is a great guy to deal with too.