Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    484

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by MAubrey View Post
    Do we really need to be comparing human beings to objects?
    Should we compare them to highways?
    I tend to procrastinate on stuff. One of these days I'll do something about it.

  2. #32
    Andy Eads
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Pasco, Washington - the dry side of the state
    Posts
    210

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    I made an inadvertent test on the latent image characteristics of both films. I shot two sheets of each then misplaced the holders for about 3 years. I processed the film according to the original exposure/development plan. I found that there was no noticeable increase in base fog on the TMax 100 film. There was an overall base fog of about .3 on the Delta 100. However, both negatives printed well with both negatives having the planned print density range. The inference being the base fog on the Delta 100 was like a neutral density filter had been pasted to the negative. Both films did not show loss of speed or contrast due to the prolonged storage under less than ideal conditions. This speaks well of both films.

    I occasionally use cyanotype to illustrate exposure to my high school photo students and the UV absorbing characteristics of TMax eliminate using those negatives from this activity.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Eads View Post
    I made an inadvertent test on the latent image characteristics of both films. I shot two sheets of each then misplaced the holders for about 3 years. I processed the film according to the original exposure/development plan. I found that there was no noticeable increase in base fog on the TMax 100 film. There was an overall base fog of about .3 on the Delta 100. However, both negatives printed well with both negatives having the planned print density range. The inference being the base fog on the Delta 100 was like a neutral density filter had been pasted to the negative. Both films did not show loss of speed or contrast due to the prolonged storage under less than ideal conditions. This speaks well of both films.

    I occasionally use cyanotype to illustrate exposure to my high school photo students and the UV absorbing characteristics of TMax eliminate using those negatives from this activity.
    Interesting information. It is possible that TMX emulsion is more stable, but also it could depend a bit of when each expired, and preserving conditions before the shot.

    I guess that TMX may have other sensitizing dyes, perhaps discovered for color film. That (sometines nasty to remove) pink tint suggest a different dye sensitizing apporach, I guess more advanced.

    Anyway I also think both films are equally good for most situations.

    Do you think Spectral Sensitivity is different ?

    Do you think that TMX UV blocking feature will modify a bit the look for shots done with sunlight illuminated subjects ?

    Should place a UV filter on D100 to have same look ?

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    on the banks of the Potomac
    Posts
    2,238

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    In the immortal words of the late Fred Picker: TRY IT.[B][/B

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Sampson View Post
    In the immortal words of the late Fred Picker: TRY IT.[B][/B
    Of course !!! With film nothing subtitutes testing, you are right...

    Anyway informaton from others also help to interpret what you test.

    Thanks for make me dicover Picker: http://www.fototv.com/refining_the_print

  6. #36
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    6,369

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie View Post
    Have been told by a few whose work I admire that the 'yellow filter effect' of TMax 100 darkens blue a bit and as a result deep shadows under clear blue skies goes darker than normal and loses detail. Also told this is not a problem with other films.

    Anyone actually checked this out?
    I have always treated TMax100 as such. I prefer a light sky, and a yellow on TMax100 always darkened the sky more than I wanted. This past couple of weeks I was out in Death Valley. I had both TMax400 and FP4+ loaded in the 8x10 holders (and some Tri-X 320). I only had a yellow filter for the 300mm, so used the FP4+ with that lens (and filter); and TMax400 with the 250mm and the 360mm if the sky was significant to the image. I figure the skies will be rendered fairly close between the two films.

    I re-took this image (6yrs ago...palms are now dead). Same film (FP4+) as the original, I took the original with and without a yellow filter. I printed the one with the filter, I believe. I re-took it with a slightly longer lens (360 vs 300mm) from about the same spot, no filter. it will be fun to see how they compare.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Spring_Death_Valley.jpg  
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    56

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    I'd ask if you think that, because different spectral response, one can make TMX look like D100 by using a pale yellow filter ?
    Quote Originally Posted by IanG View Post
    You're muddling Orthochromatic which is red blind, with the extended red sensitivity of Tmax 100 which is the total opposite. Better red sensitivity is important at low light levels where there's far less light from the Blue end of the spectrum but with a daylight image it's marginal.Ian
    Quote Originally Posted by Pere Casals View Post
    Anyway I don't understant the reason as Spectral Response of TMX shows to me the counter, look the Kodak plot: it's more sensitive to blue than normal, so to get same response you should place the yellow filter on TMX to get same combined blue sensitivity than D100. I think the plot says it.
    The Kodak spectral plot is for uniform energy (although, technically, it should not say erg/cm2, but erg/cm2/nm). While the Ilford plot is whetever density is produced by a 2850K blackbody. The latter has vanishing energy in the blue. Had the Ilford plot been normalized for energy, it would (in relative terms) have more blue and less red sensitivity than the Kodak one. Can't be more specific without having the respective data in numeric form.

    Side note #1. Interesting to me! this is the first time I realize that Kodak and Ilford plots are normalized in different ways. The rising sensitivity towards the blue/violet end of the spectrum of TMX (and presumably Delta 100 when plotted in energy units) is good reason to use a yellow filter (which I did! on empirical grounds)

    Side note #2. Is there an official definition of orthopanchromatic? Ot has this been made up for hype, like "high silver content"? I don't even know if it means "in-between panchro and ortho" or "panchro, only more so" (even more red sensitive)?

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Thanks for your information.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernard_L View Post
    Side note #2. Is there an official definition of orthopanchromatic? Ot has this been made up for hype, like "high silver content"? I don't even know if it means "in-between panchro and ortho" or "panchro, only more so" (even more red sensitive)?

    Not al all, you can directly relate Pinaverdol sensitizing dye to orthopanchromatic performance.

    Well, there is a big difference between Ortho and Panchro: Red blind vs sensitive to full visible spectrum. OrthoPan is the middle point.

    I consider with Ortho look the emulsions with Erytrosine sensitization dye. OrthoPan those with Pinaverdol. Panchro those with Pinacyanol (full red sensitive) and some Pinaverdol to get also good green sensibility.


    Fuji Neopan Acros say in the data sheet it's Orthopanchromatic, page 1, section 4

    http://www.foto-r3.com/files/acros.pdf


    Note that 2017 marketed emulsions also use other sensitizing dyes, some secret, discovered for color film manufacturing.


    IMHO, it's a well stablished photographic term, I ignore if there is a technical definition, nm based.

    Recently I've discovered all that because I'm engaging dry plate, and I'm troubled by trying to obtain relatively good emulsion.

    A lot of fun

    Regards.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernard_L View Post

    Side note #1. Interesting to me! this is the first time I realize that Kodak and Ilford plots are normalized in different ways. The rising sensitivity towards the blue/violet end of the spectrum of TMX (and presumably Delta 100 when plotted in energy units) is good reason to use a yellow filter (which I did! on empirical grounds)
    It looks that John Sexton says that TMX is designed to need less the yellow filter, but he does not say why.

    Perhaps UV blocking feature of TMX removes the sunlight UV effect, and for this reason needs less the yellow filter.

    This UV blocking feature is bad for UV alternative printing, but may have the benefit of not needing an UV filter, and less need of a yellow.


    But it would be important to know if UV blocking is made in the emulsion or in the base. If not made in the emulsion then my theory is wrong.

    [When I can I'll test that, I'll remove the emulsion and I'll see if UV blocking is still there...

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    354

    Re: Delta 100 vs TMX technical differences

    Pere:

    In the original tech sheets Kodak indicated the TMax emulsions were designed to have slightly less blue sensitivity than other panchromatic films, in order to more closely approximate the sensitivity of the eye. This has nothing to do with the UV attenuating dyes which were/are on the film base.

Similar Threads

  1. The quality and technical differences in Process lenses at 600mm and longer?
    By Asher Kelman in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 1-Aug-2011, 10:16
  2. Differences between CPE-2 and CPE-2 Plus
    By jrpac in forum Darkroom: Equipment
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-Apr-2010, 07:00
  3. Reciprocity calculation for Delta 100 and Delta 400
    By timbo10ca in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 20-Dec-2008, 10:09
  4. Technical versus non-technical approaches - which?
    By Robert McClure in forum On Photography
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 7-Jan-2006, 14:12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •