PDA

View Full Version : TMY-2 v. Tmax 100



Ed Richards
12-Feb-2008, 16:58
Read the VC article, but it does not mention anything about Tmax 100 - what I am curious about is how close the new Tmax 400 is to Tmax 100. Anyone done any comparisons? I would love to just shoot Tmax 400.

cotdt
20-Feb-2008, 13:58
The new TMY-2 400 is the worst B&W film I've ever seen. What a disgrace! Seriously, it looks like a color film converted to grayscale. Its response curve is very linear and does not have the classic B&W look. The older TMY had more grain, but the midtones were more contrasty and the images had more "pop!" If I had wanted to go after the look of the new TMY-2, I would just use my digital camera and convert them to grayscale. How boring that would be.

The TMX 100 is an OK film, but it also suffers from blocked out highlights. Try Kodak Technical Pan film, it's far better.

Don Hutton
20-Feb-2008, 15:15
The new TMY-2 400 is the worst B&W film I've ever seen. What a disgrace! Seriously, it looks like a color film converted to grayscale. Its response curve is very linear and does not have the classic B&W look. The older TMY had more grain, but the midtones were more contrasty and the images had more "pop!" If I had wanted to go after the look of the new TMY-2, I would just use my digital camera and convert them to grayscale. How boring that would be.

The TMX 100 is an OK film, but it also suffers from blocked out highlights. Try Kodak Technical Pan film, it's far better.Tech Pan is really cool because it's so readily available.... Clearly you should be sticking to your digicam if that, or film which is no longer produced is what does it for you. For those with more interest in available emulsions, my experience with the new TMY is very positive - very similar response to the previous TMY (yes - a very linear response was a distinguishing charateristic of that film too...), excellent speed and significantly finer grain. It's that much closer to the grain of Tmax 100 that I will probably not bother to shoot Tmax 100 in roll film formats anymore because of the massive speed advantages of TMY-2 (over 2 stops). I'm busy doing some BTZS testing at present with TMY-2 and TMY-1 in Pyrocat HD and TMax developer. I'll post this data if it's of interest. BTW, blocked out highlights result from overexposure and development - both of which can be controlled with care and knowledge of your materials. If anyone is interested, I'll email them a full size Jpeg of a drum scan of the new TMY.

Ken Lee
20-Feb-2008, 16:29
"that classic B&W look"

By "classic", do you mean something like this ? A lot of people consider it a classic.


http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/aa.jpg

.. or perhaps something a bit more classic, like this... ?


http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/BCBent.jpg

Don Hutton
20-Feb-2008, 17:22
That is funny Ken!

sanking
20-Feb-2008, 17:22
Read the VC article, but it does not mention anything about Tmax 100 - what I am curious about is how close the new Tmax 400 is to Tmax 100. Anyone done any comparisons? I would love to just shoot Tmax 400.

Depends on format and print size, but the RMS of Tmax 100 is still lower than that of the new TMY-2. And visually, Tmax 100 has finer grain to my eyes.

If you work with LF of 4X5 or larger my personal opinion is that you would not see any advantage in Tmax 100 over TMY-2 in normal print sizes of 20X24" or smaller. In sizes of 30X40" or more there should be an improvement in grain with Tmax 100.

For MF, I would limit print size to 11X14" or less with TMY-2, and anything over that to Tmax 100, or Fuji Acros, which has the finest grain of any 100-125 ASA film.

Sandy King

sanking
20-Feb-2008, 17:27
BTW, blocked out highlights result from overexposure and development - both of which can be controlled with care and knowledge of your materials. If anyone is interested, I'll email them a full size Jpeg of a drum scan of the new TMY.

It is a shame that some people blame TMY for blocked up highlights when the problem is their own lack of knowledge (or lack of control) of proper exposure and development procedures.

I think TMY (old and new) is a wonderful film. Like Ken, if I could only have one film for LF work it would be TMY or TMY-2. For MF I would go with Acros.

Sandy King

Ken Lee
20-Feb-2008, 17:40
That is funny Ken!

I'm glad.

cotdt: I'm sorry if I was rude or disrespectful. I misunderstood the tone of your posting.

D. Bryant
20-Feb-2008, 17:41
The new TMY-2 400 is the worst B&W film I've ever seen. What a disgrace! Seriously, it looks like a color film converted to grayscale. Its response curve is very linear and does not have the classic B&W look. The older TMY had more grain, but the midtones were more contrasty and the images had more "pop!" If I had wanted to go after the look of the new TMY-2, I would just use my digital camera and convert them to grayscale. How boring that would be.

The TMX 100 is an OK film, but it also suffers from blocked out highlights. Try Kodak Technical Pan film, it's far better.
You are pulling our legs - Right?!

Don Bryant

Armin Seeholzer
21-Feb-2008, 04:54
"The new TMY-2 400 is the worst B&W film I've ever seen. What a disgrace! Seriously, it looks like a color film converted to grayscale. Its response curve is very linear and does not have the classic B&W look. The older TMY had more grain, but the midtones were more contrasty and the images had more "pop!" If I had wanted to go after the look of the new TMY-2, I would just use my digital camera and convert them to grayscale. How boring that would be.

The TMX 100 is an OK film, but it also suffers from blocked out highlights. Try Kodak Technical Pan film, it's far better."

Bevor you state so much s..... you should really learn to work with a film.
Maybe you did never master a film!!!!
My 2 cents

chilihead
22-Feb-2008, 07:11
[QUOTE=cotdt;321689]The new TMY-2 400 is the worst B&W film I've ever seen. What a disgrace! Seriously, it looks like a color film converted to grayscale. Its response curve is very linear and does not have the classic B&W look. The older TMY had more grain, but the midtones were more contrasty and the images had more "pop!" If I had wanted to go after the look of the new TMY-2, I would just use my digital camera and convert them to grayscale. How boring that would be.

The TMX 100 is an OK film, but it also suffers from blocked out highlights. Try Kodak Technical Pan film, it's far better. ....... Cleerly, dis Guy is a Photagreefer and a GEEnius - and - Kodak shud lissen to his wizzDum...

Ken Lee
22-Feb-2008, 07:15
Here is a shot I made the other day on TMAX 100 roll-film, at ISO 50, developed in D-76 1:1. It was taken with a 1950's Agfa Isolette 6x6 folding camera, with no filter. I simply took an incident meter reading of the sun., which was 1/125 at f/11, the classic "Sunny 16" exposure for that film speed (1/50 at f/16).

From what I can tell, the high values are fine. The negative scans easily. If I wanted to give the image more "pop", that would be no problem in Photoshop. But even so, it's good to have a linear result to start with.


http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/img187A.jpg

Rory_5244
22-Feb-2008, 09:15
Looks good to me: you can do anything with that negative. I've actually never managed to blow out highlights with TMX, although I've done it with HP5+. I like rating TMX at ISO 200 these days. Here's a straight shot taken with a Mamiya TLR.

http://www.trinidaddreamscape.net/pichost/wftb2.jpg

Joseph O'Neil
22-Feb-2008, 09:24
wish I could jump in and add to the praise or not, but still no new T-Max here in Canada. :(

..and yes, I've been in FOUR camera stores in the past 48 hours, including the one store actively trying to get the stuff for me, and no luck so far.

So who is selling the stuff mail order in the USA right now (4x5 please).
:)

blevblev
22-Feb-2008, 11:03
I know that Calumet (calumetphoto.com) has it.

Ed Richards
22-Feb-2008, 14:20
Calumet says they do not have it yet in 4x5.

steve simmons
22-Feb-2008, 14:23
I have a box!!! Who wants it???

First person to call and offer to pay shippng

We will be in the office till 3:30pm Mountain time and back Monday morning at 7am Mountain Time. Calls have to come in while we are here and a live person has to answer - we don't want to try and sort out voice mails

steve simmons
view camera magazine
505-899-8054

steve simmons
22-Feb-2008, 14:37
Film has been claimed.

steve simmons

Jan Pedersen
22-Feb-2008, 14:41
Thanks very much Steve. Nice end to the week. :D

jan

blevblev
22-Feb-2008, 20:57
Calumet says they do not have it yet in 4x5.

We're talking about 400 T-max, right? I recieved a box from Calumet today. Are there more than one 400 Tmax films?

................

Ok - I searched around and found thar the newer 400 Tmax has a red banner that says "sharpest black and white 400" on the front and "new developing times" on the back. The box of 50 4x5 400 Tmax that I recieved from Calumet today has both of these labels.

Jan Pedersen
22-Feb-2008, 21:08
Are there more than one 400 Tmax films?
Yes, there's the new version which will have a red sticker in the lower right hand side of the box and then there's the old version with a plain yellow box.
So, if the film you bought does not have the red sticker it is the old version.

steve simmons
23-Feb-2008, 05:36
I've already posted this once but will do so again. The revised T-Max 400 box looks like this - the red box on the label is the difference. We will have an article comparing the old and new T-Max 400 in the March issue of View Camera.

There is an article in progress comparing T-Max 100 with the new T-Max 400. This will be in our May issue and in the Subscriber's Section of the View Camera web site mid to late March.

steve simmons

Ed Richards
23-Feb-2008, 06:34
BlevBlev,

Both Calumet and BH said that their problem with verifying whether they are shipping the new film is that Kodak did not change the part #. Since Calumut is a pretty serious pro place, I am assuming they do FIFO inventory, so if you got a box, they must gone through their old inventory. Did you mail order it from the main location?

steve simmons
23-Feb-2008, 07:55
Both Calumet and BH said that their problem with verifying whether they are shipping the new film is that Kodak did not change the part #.

can't they look at the box??

Actually, this is not a completly fair question. You are askng a salesperson in a cubicle and the film could be miles away in a warehouse.

But now that we know.....

steve simmons

kay tokugo
23-Feb-2008, 11:05
I haven't tried the new TMY-2, but I am very happy using the regular TMY. I still have 500+ sheets of 4x5 left and will buy another 1000 sheets before the end of the year. Ilford film is nice, too, but it is too inconsistent. Never had any issue with Kodak film....or Fuji for that matter. Their quality control is superb. If your TMY highlights are blocking up you ought to process it for a shorter time, or use weaker dilutions. Shoot ten sheets of the same thing, then with the same developer process each one slightly differently. You'll find the right combination pretty quick.

D. Bryant
23-Feb-2008, 12:09
Both Calumet and BH said that their problem with verifying whether they are shipping the new film is that Kodak did not change the part #.

can't they look at the box??

Actually, this is not a completly fair question. You are askng a salesperson in a cubicle and the film could be miles away in a warehouse.

But now that we know.....

steve simmons
Actually it is a fair question even if Kodak used the same cat #. Both B&H and Calumet say that have an internal work around for the problem. Even so, I still received the old emulsion from B&H after being promised that I would receive the new.

Don Bryant

blevblev
23-Feb-2008, 16:24
Did you mail order it from the main location?

I ordered it online, so I don't think there's any way to tell. If it would be by the return address on the box, it's too late because I threw out the box. Anyway, I got the new version.