Re: Why couldn't it have been double-x!???

From: Jim Carlile (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Apr 06 2010 - 15:47:08 PDT

In a message dated 4/6/2010 3:26:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
email suppressed writes:

I think it would be a big decision to remove tri-x in 35mm still film too
where it is kind of huge. I wish they would re-introduce Tri-x neg tho. Has
to be nicer than double-x neg.

Tri-X still is a different film with a different film speed. There'd be a
riot if they got rid of that.
And you should be able to get anything from Kodak at their distribution
centers-- some stocks have minimums but many do not.
BTW, Kodak says they will be bringing out some new super 8 stocks, so who
knows what's up? I'm just glad they're still around.
But yes, Double-X neg over Plus-X neg is baffling....
And-- if Kodak is axing Plus-X neg for movies, then the still version is
soon to go as well...

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.