Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....
From: benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:00:46 +1030
References: <ee8fa51c1003210323m5b92affo7ae4d9ecf1b39340@mail.gmail.com> <C7CB8065.5FC9E%mark@rabinergroup.com> <ee8fa51c1003211440x371f9665m7bd85f5306847e04@mail.gmail.com> <c7c8cf881003212056g26b09d22k6d3aa5c68e854cc@mail.gmail.com> <eb6799211003212058l7b05e83bif265a917acd9ece4@mail.gmail.com> <ee8fa51c1003212114p7eca8481rc85c6145e5d46a6c@mail.gmail.com>

Kodak's exact wording was "due to significantly decreased sales volumes".

Marty

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> 
wrote:
> I don't know exactly why Kodak discontinued Tri-X Pro rollfilm, except
> that in the discontinuation notice they said demand had dropped
> significantly. ?I always preferred Tri-X 400 too and thought it was
> very poor marketing that two dissimilar films could have confusingly
> similar names. ?But Kodak also does that with T-Max and T-Max RS
> developers and a number of other products.
>
> Marty
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Richard Man <richard at imagecraft.com> 
> wrote:
>> Tri-X PRO has nothing to do with Tri-X, except both are from Kodak :-)
>>
>> I used ~10 rolls. It's pretty good, but I like TMY-2 better, and Tri-X
>> better still.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Pasvorn Boonmark <pasvorn at 
>> boonmark.net>wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Tri-X Pro rollfilm has recently been discontinued too. ?I will miss
>>> > 220 - it was nice to be able to get twice as many shots. ?I won't miss
>>> > getting it onto the reels to develop it, something I always found a
>>> > little tricky.
>>> >
>>> > Marty
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Do you know the reason behind the Tri-X Pro discontinue?
>>> I still have some in my refrigerator. ?These are 220 and rated at ISO 
>>> 320.
>>>
>>> I am not that impress, except that I have double the shots. :)
>>> Somehow, I like the non-Pro better.
>>>
>>> -Pasvorn
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> // richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/> blog: <
>> http://imagecraft.wordpress.com>
>> // portfolio: <http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/PICS/AnotherCalifornia2>
>> // mailing lists: <http://www.imagecraft.com/contact.html>
>> [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all 
>> previous
>> replies in your msgs. ]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>


In reply to: Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)
Message from pasvorn at boonmark.net (Pasvorn Boonmark) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)
Message from richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] FujiFilm discontinues some films.....)