New Freestyle Premium film ID?

John wrote:
One thing that nudged me to question a pure economic motive comes from
having my butt kicked for having suggested that Kodak's move to T-Grain
film was to save money. People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that
Kodak wasn't trying to save money, but just making the film better. I
HATE TGrain film. That one comes from column B.

They WERE trying to make a better film. They succeeded. Kodak Ektar 25,
was IMHO the best color negative film ever made.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM

"John" wrote

People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that Kodak wasn't trying to
save money [with TMax], but just making the film better.

I don't know they were trying to save money more than
they were trying to make money. Making money means
reducing costs - saving money - but saving isn't the
goal. "We saved our stockholders $1.4b" isn't going
to do the stock price much good, just get a convention
hall full of people scratching their heads. My Aunt surprised
my uncle one day: "Alec, I just saved us $10,000 -
I bought a Jaguar on sale".

And you aren't going to sell a new film if you don't
make it better.

Better and cheaper: the modern economy. And we all
love it.

But, suggest that something was done to 'save money' and
people get hysterical. But ask them if they think _they_
should save money and they nod their heads in virtue.

I don't know how the great unwashed would respond to:
"We found a way to raise our manufacturing costs for
our new product". Would they applaud and say "Yes,
charge me more! Charge me more! I want to pay More!
Use more silver. Silver Rich is Good - we need more
metals pollution! Go Team Go."

Selling a new car: "We manufacture ten items in the engine
compartment that aren't needed, they just raise the
price of the car." "Great, I'll buy it!".

"We put twice as much silver in the film as needed". "Great,
I'll buy it!". And they do.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

In article ,
(Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:

John wrote:
One thing that nudged me to question a pure economic motive comes from
having my butt kicked for having suggested that Kodak's move to T-Grain
film was to save money. People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that
Kodak wasn't trying to save money, but just making the film better. I
HATE TGrain film. That one comes from column B.

They WERE trying to make a better film. They succeeded. Kodak Ektar 25,
was IMHO the best color negative film ever made.

Geoff.

I'll second that. It's a crime that it isn't still available.

--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)

"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social*climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that*makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -‹Thomas Lipscomb

In article ,
"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:

Snip

"We put twice as much silver in the film as needed". "Great,
I'll buy it!". And they do.

That was worth saving

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

Kodak Ektar 25

And the other members Club 25:
Kodachrome 25 and Technical Pan.

If a film were to survive on it's merits then those three
are the ones that should be _kept_ in production, and the
hell will all the rest: "Let them eat bytes".


"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -‹Thomas Lipscomb

Funny, what are all those Unitarians doing pretending
to be Episcopalians.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

Charles Hohenstein wrote:
In article ,
(Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:

John wrote:
One thing that nudged me to question a pure economic motive comes from
having my butt kicked for having suggested that Kodak's move to T-Grain
film was to save money. People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that
Kodak wasn't trying to save money, but just making the film better. I
HATE TGrain film. That one comes from column B.
They WERE trying to make a better film. They succeeded. Kodak Ektar 25,
was IMHO the best color negative film ever made.

Geoff.

I'll second that. It's a crime that it isn't still available.

Not enough users bought enough of it.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 18:10:01 up 5 days, 16 min, 4 users, load average: 3.41, 3.78, 4.10

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
"John" wrote

People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that Kodak wasn't trying to
save money [with TMax], but just making the film better.

I don't know they were trying to save money more than
they were trying to make money.

Of course that is what I meant. Didn't t-grain film cut the silver content?

And you aren't going to sell a new film if you don't
make it better.

In my opinion the film did not get better.

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
John wrote:
One thing that nudged me to question a pure economic motive comes from
having my butt kicked for having suggested that Kodak's move to T-Grain
film was to save money. People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that
Kodak wasn't trying to save money, but just making the film better. I
HATE TGrain film. That one comes from column B.

They WERE trying to make a better film. They succeeded. Kodak Ektar 25,
was IMHO the best color negative film ever made.

I hope I made it clear that I was addressing B&W T-Grain film.

John wrote:
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
John wrote:
One thing that nudged me to question a pure economic motive comes from
having my butt kicked for having suggested that Kodak's move to T-Grain
film was to save money. People jumped out of the woodwork screaming that
Kodak wasn't trying to save money, but just making the film better. I
HATE TGrain film. That one comes from column B.
They WERE trying to make a better film. They succeeded. Kodak Ektar 25,
was IMHO the best color negative film ever made.

I hope I made it clear that I was addressing B&W T-Grain film.

I thought they did make a better B&W T-Grain film. It TMax films are both
sharper, finer-grained, and have a straighter D/H curve than any I have ever
used in sheet sizes, anyway.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 19:10:01 up 5 days, 1:16, 4 users, load average: 4.11, 4.02, 4.06

Jean-David Beyer wrote:

I thought they did make a better B&W T-Grain film. It TMax films are both
sharper, finer-grained, and have a straighter D/H curve than any I have ever
used in sheet sizes, anyway.

That straighter curve has me puzzled. Doesn't it compress
luminance/density values? Maybe habit has prejudiced me. I'll have to
try some in 4x5 so that perhaps I'll understand why some like it.