ThomasPauly
On the ADOX website, I’ve come across a new product called Adox Silvermax. According to the description, with its particularly silver-rich 100 ASA emulsion, this film could be a worthy successor to the discontinued EFKE range. When will it be available to buy?
Gast
It's a shame it's not available on roll film !!!!!
gurkensaft
Hi Wolfgang.
Am I missing something? What does ‘gibt’ mean?
So far, I’ve only found the announcement, with no details on which formats, the price, and, most importantly, when
this gem will be available.
I must have a blind spot.
But apart from that, I’m looking forward to a new film (or perhaps an old favourite in a new guise..?), especially as ‘silver-rich’ sounds good!
Regards, Torsten
bernhardmangelsgmxde
That sounds VERY interesting! I’d take “New at Photokina 2012” to mean that at least a few films will be handed out at the trade fair… and that we’ll be able to buy them in the near future?
Gast
Hi Wolfgang.
Am I missing something? What does ‘gibt’ mean?
So far, I’ve only found the announcement, with no details on which formats, the price, and, most importantly, when
the item will be available.
I must have a blind spot.
But apart from that, I’m looking forward to a new film (or perhaps an old favourite in a new guise..?), especially as ‘silver-rich’ sounds good!
Regards, Torsten
http://www.adox.de/ADOX_Filme/Silvermax/Silvermax.html
gurkensaft
I’ve already been there.
But there’s no mention of the things mentioned above. (It just shows a 35mm cassette...)
Or am I completely missing the point?
Regards, Torsten
Gast
I’ve already been there.
But there’s no mention of the things mentioned above. (It just shows a 35mm cassette...)
Or am I completely missing the point?
Regards, Torsten
Well, here’s what it says to me:
[size=2]New for Photokina 2012:
[size=5]
ADOX SILVERMAX
[/size]
SILVERMAX contains more silver than a comparable 100 ASA film.
This allows it to build up extreme density and achieve a printing range of up to 14 zones (in SILVERMAX developer).
You get everything in the negative: from the deepest shadows to the finest highlights.
SILVERMAX has an anti-halation layer between the emulsion and the base (an ADOX invention from the 1950s).
This produces excellent detail contrast and extremely high sharpness.
SILVERMAX has an extremely fine grain comparable to flat-crystal films. It derives its coverage and speed from the silver.
SILVERMAX is cast on crystal-clear triacetate and can optionally be reversal-processed to produce black-and-white transparency.
Made in Germany.
Available formats:[/size]
Note: As Silvermax is extremely expensive to produce, it can only be offered economically as 35mm film.
This format also allows its strengths to be shown to their best advantage.
No other formats are planned.
Best regards
Wolfgang
gurkensaft
Thanks, Wolfgang.
For me, it stops at "...gets its opacity and speed from the silver".
I suppose I'll have to check my browser...
Regards, Torsten
sputnik
[size=2]New for Photokina 2012:
[size=5] ADOX SILVERMAX
[/size]
SILVERMAX contains approximately 2.5 times as much silver as a comparable 100 ASA film.[/size]
For those interested, there is a very interesting thread on this subject:
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum205/36863-how-make-best-emulsion-why-silver-rich-myth.html
adophil
Despite the flowery description, which somehow reminds me of a fellow competitor from BS, I might be interested in the film. I might be, but only in MF and above. It’s a shame – once again, no sign of thinking globally and, above all, acting locally...
TiMo
"It can only be sold commercially as 35mm film."
Are there really that many fewer 120 films sold than 135 films?
There also seems to be a special developer for Silvermax. See the ADOX homepage, Photokina News.
piu58
It’s probably a question of the cost per negative. For 120 film, this is about three times higher than for 135. The question is simply whether anyone would be willing to pay, say, €10 for a roll film. The phrase “[font="Verdana"][size="1"]extremely expensive to produce [/size]” points to this price range.
TiMo
Hi Uwe,
Surely the area covered by a film should be smaller than or equal to that of a 135 film with 36 exposures when using 120 film.
Best regards, Tim
sputnik
Spoilsport!
Oh, and since everyone here seems to love reminiscing about the 1950s. BACK THEN, the price of a roll film from ADOX was just under 57% of the price of a 36-exposure 35mm cassette of the same film type*. The situation was similar with other film manufacturers. ;-)
*Source: Photo-Porst price list, 1954
adophil
It’s probably down to the cost per negative. For 120 film, this is about three times higher than for 135.
...which is likely to apply to all films from all manufacturers.
bernhardmangelsgmxde
It’s probably about the cost per negative. For 120 film, this is about three times higher than for 135. The question is simply whether anyone would pay, say, €10 for a roll of film. “[font=Verdana][size=1]extremely expensive to produce [/size]” points to this price range.
The word “extremely” appears so often in the description that I don’t believe (or hope...) that “extremely expensive to produce” is really to be taken so literally as to mean the film would have to cost three times as much as a Tmax to be offered at a viable price. When I read “extremely sharp” and “extremely fine grain”, I don’t immediately assume that Tmax 100 or Acros are out of focus grain monsters by comparison...
GeorgK
Announcements like this naturally invite speculation, so I’m not going to hold back.
Crystal-clear base, antihalation layer beneath the emulsion, Made in Germany.... hmmmm
What’s more, the late, great R3 was known for having a ‘normal’ speed of around 400 ASA, but only just exceeding 100 ASA in fine-grain developer (regardless of Maco’s fanciful figures). And it wasn’t actually that bad – even though the artists, misled by the advertising, all dutifully sent it to contrast hell in AM-74 at 640 ASA, with the corresponding consequences for the image.
So I’m going to guess it’s a “close relative”.
But I’m happy to be (reasonably) contradicted.
However, I consider formulations like “extremely expensive” to be counterproductive; that only provokes opposition in a spiteful tone (the usual suspects will be discussing the price per kilo of silver nitrate more often in future). It should suffice to point out to the informed consumer that it is simply more expensive (or, if you like, “significantly more expensive”) or more labour-intensive to produce, and that this must be reflected in the price.
Everyone also understands that you don’t immediately stock tens of thousands of a new product in every format. On the other hand, most (or at least some) photographers are perfectly capable of comparing the square centimetres of a 120 and a 135/36.
Georg
u_d
Come on, you can do better than that!
I’m going to have a go at speculating, based on the half-baked knowledge I’ve picked up from avidly reading forums, about film production conditions in Germany in general and at FOTOIMPEX in particular:
The emulsion is relatively expensive, so the residue of the production process has to be streamlined. 135 film can be poured onto a base at Filmotec, which they have in stock anyway (variable costs only), and is then finished in-house (contribution margin for their own equipment).
120 film would require pre-financing of the base, perhaps with a minimum order quantity larger than necessary for the targeted batch size, which would mean additional storage costs for the unused residue of the base. Assembling 120 film is already more expensive than 135 film. Furthermore, it can no longer be done cheaply in Croatia, so we would have to rely on Ilford, for example. The whole thing would then become so expensive that the costs would no longer be in reasonable proportion to the expected benefits from MF.
Does anything about this argument seem illogical?
HenningH
Am I the only one who hates clear film base?
I’m more than happy to pay a reasonable price for a good film.
But why are ‘new’ films always made on this clear base, which only causes me problems and offers no benefits? Is it really that important that every film can be developed as a slide? In the old days, there was only Scala and Fomapan R...
piu58
> A 120 format would mean the distributor would have to provide upfront funding
The APX-100 with a 35mm base (135 mm) was also available in roll film spools. We can live with that.
