Kodak Alaris successor of Easman Kodak + Kodak LF formats still available

[TheToadMen]

There was a thread on APUG about Kodak Alaris and Lomography, see: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum390/...phy-alive.html

Besides the Lomo part in that discussion, I thought I might share this info I posted on APUG about Kodak films and papers and the continued availability LF formats:

This is the open letter from Kodak Alaris to all Lomographers:
(click here to download the letter as a PDF file)

It says that Alaris are committed to:
- "trusted and beloved Kodak-still-camera film products", and:
- "the widest range of traditional photographic paper and workflow solutions for labs".
It also says:
"More importantly, we will continue to offer the full portfolio of photographic films and papers." It then mentions Portra films, Tri-X and Endura Metallic paper.

See these two statements from a interview with Lars Fielder, Product Marketing Director at Kodak Alaris:

Are there any plans for Kodak to release any new films? As mentioned before, I believe that the key message to all those film shooters out there is that the full range of photographic films continues to be available. In addition to that, we do run a program that offers the possibility to order large format sized sheet film items on a special order basis. These are being offered via selective partners, e.g. K.B. Cenham Cameras in the US or GFH-Foto in Germany. More details can be found on http://www.kodakalaris.com/go/professional

Are there any plans to bring back previously discontinued films? Again, it is key for all film lovers that there are no immediate changes planned to our portfolio of photographic films. That said, all decisions to discontinue films in the past were driven by changes in user preferences and or the digital substitution, resulting in the demand of these specific films dropping off a cliff which made it unsustainable to keep them unfortunately. All of these films were old emulsions. At the same time, we have continued to optimize many films in our portfolio and added innovative new ones, like the EKTAR 100.

Full interview here: http://www.lomography.com/magazine/n...rce=newsletter

Whatever I think of Lomography (as a company), I'm glad that these Kodak products will still be around.

I found the list with special order formats:

Special-Order Sheet Films / Film / size / Cat No.
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 100 Film / TMX / 50sh 5x7 inch / 1325000
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 100 Film / TMX / 10sh 8x10 inch / 8095440
KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 320 Film / 320 TXP / 10sh 8x10 inch / 8179707
KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X 320 Film / 320 TXP / 10sh 11x14 inch / 8079444
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY / 50sh 5x7 inch / 8916587
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY / 50sh 13x18 cm / 1182732
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY / 10sh 8x10 inch / 1930106
KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX 400 Film / TMY / 10sh 8x20 inch / 1718006
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 160 Film / 50sh 5x7 inch / 1355825
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 160 Film / 10sh 12x20 inch / 1682293
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 160 Film / 10sh 20x24 inch / 1740679
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 400 Film / 50sh 5x7 inch / 1967801
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 400 Film / 50sh 8x10 inch / 1462159
KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 400 Film / 50sh 11x14 inch / 1614205
KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTAR 100 Film / 50sh 6x7 inch / 1561901 (probably typo: 6x7 should be 5x7 inch??)
KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTAR 100 Film / 10sh 8x10 inch / 8877516

Source: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...lmsIndex.jhtml
It says:

The following KODAK PROFESSIONAL Black & White and Color Negative Films are offered world-wide. Please contact your Stockhouse dealer regarding availability. 2013 Pro Film list
In addition, the following sheet film items are available on a special-order basis.2013 Pro Sheet Film Special-Order list.
U.S. based K. B. Canham Cameras collects orders via their web site and when sufficient quantities are obtained for a particular size, Kodak manufactures and ships the film. Your Stockhouse dealer may also carry one or more of these sizes. If you are unable to obtain any of the films listed, please email: profilm@kodak.com

This is the link for the current Kodak film brochure in November 2013.

[Wayne Lambert]

Never thought I'd see the day when 8 x 10 Tri-X was not in their "Pro Film List." Sad.

Wayne

[Kodachrome25]

Never thought I'd see the day when 8 x 10 Tri-X was not in their "Pro Film List." Sad.

Really? I would think not being able to get it at all would be sad, at least you can still buy it...

[Wayne Lambert]

Well, that's true. So, sort of sad. (But, still, 8 x 10 was such a professional format and Tri-X was such a professional film...)

Wayne

[StoneNYC]

Well, that's true. So, sort of sad. (But, still, 8 x 10 was such a professional format and Tri-X was such a professional film...)

Wayne

I went through this a while ago, it seems choosing between TXP and 400TX they decided (probably by sales numbers) that TXP would be the preference and kept that line.

As Dan says, at least you can get it cut still.

[Drew Wiley]

The key word is "was". And TMY400 is the nail that sealed that coffin shut. Just be glad you still have a choice.

[StoneNYC]

The key word is "was". And TMY400 is the nail that sealed that coffin shut. Just be glad you still have a choice.

Well you would think to keep things consistent throughout each line, they would have gotten rid of TXP since TMY is the new "pro" version while 400TX is the "classic".

If I could have 400TX in 4x5 that would be my preference. Then that whole TXP vs TMY-2 thread I starter wouldn't have existed lol.

[Drew Wiley]

Stone - TMY refers to TMax400, not Tri-X. The connotation of Tri-X as a popular professional film is largely an anachronism. If TMY-2 had been invented thirty
years ago, Tri-X would have been a dodo before you were born. I'm not suggesting that it doesn't deserve a following, but that there is something a lot more versatile out there now, with higher speed, much greater latitude, and finer grain. Tri-X is basically dinosaur food, and will last only until the next asteroid strikes.
That has been Kodak's strategy for some time now - replace a huge redundant selection with a smaller selection of more versatile films. TMY-2 basically knocks both
the two old commercial standbys (Tri-X and Super-XX) off their block, though it doesn't precisely replicate either, or make just everyone happy.

[StoneNYC]

Stone - TMY refers to TMax400, not Tri-X. The connotation of Tri-X as a popular professional film is largely an anachronism. If TMY-2 had been invented thirty
years ago, Tri-X would have been a dodo before you were born. I'm not suggesting that it doesn't deserve a following, but that there is something a lot more versatile out there now, with higher speed, much greater latitude, and finer grain. Tri-X is basically dinosaur food, and will last only until the next asteroid strikes.
That has been Kodak's strategy for some time now - replace a huge redundant selection with a smaller selection of more versatile films. TMY-2 basically knocks both
the two old commercial standbys (Tri-X and Super-XX) off their block, though it doesn't precisely replicate either, or make just everyone happy.

Drew I'm not sure why you thought I was confused about what TMY was... I'm not...

And Tri-X has a classic look, and though it's not "professional" in terms of your perspective, many would consider it to be a very pro film, and the new revision of the emulsion (400TX) has a much finer grain...

As far as what I was saying, I was saying that they should have replaced TXP with TMY and kept 400TX so that when moving from size to size you wouldn't have to change your whole developing process and system with learning a new emulsion.

[Drew Wiley]

What is "classic" is all relative. If Tri-X were introduced on the market today, it would probably be a bellyflop. People just got used to it, and then tradition took over.
It's what they got used to. But by today's standards, I guess any of us sheet film users would be classified as dinosaurs. Commercial photog has largely gone digital.
So I guess it is inevitable that someone will mourn the loss of the "classic" look of early four-megapixel cameras?