In a similar context I honestly believe that the TMax (2) emulsion is likely the best film that has ever been manufactured in my lifetime. Unfortunately although I know for a fact that Kodak made the financial decision to put the $1 MM into upgrading the film themselves long before the sale to Aleris (when quite honestly TMY was already bloody good). Aleris feels the need to milk the cow of deep pockets of a few "supportive" fortunate ones to use as a business standard as opposed to broader appeal. Even though I could acquiesce to this standard I feel the need to use my pocketbook as the mile marker for reasonable business practices for the long haul and cannot bridge this bid/ask spread irrespective of the temptation when there is a 2X+ difference in price. Economics and the consumer practices have allowed me to find a visual harmonic with Ilford in my work and I have been spending regularly and as easy as it has been it has also been hard. As the economics of the niche sheet film business evolves to the new demographics in play, I hope (and pray) that TMY(2) will come back to earth in price so we can enjoy its superior capabilities. At the end of the day I ask myself a simple fundamental question. Although TMY(2) is the best IMHO, it is 2X+ better than its Ilford comparable? The short answer is no. It took me a long time to arrive at this conclusion, but the facts are what they are.
Ironically, I feel that TMY(2) is so good that Alaris has essentially cut off their nose despite their face in the fact that smaller formats can illicit results comparable to what larger more formats could produce. Why then would anyone pay such a premium in larger formats? Not what I call a sustainable business model.
Bookmarks