Kodak price jump for 8x10 320TXP

[Michael Kadillak]

Michael, as the screenshot points, we see very close prices for BW kodak and Ilford rolls, the sheet market is much smaller, so principal competition is in the roll realm.

One question.... Why TMY is better than TMX ?? I find that TMX is a way better film than TMY, if not needing speed.

Just consider that in the principal market (rolls) TMY is sold at same price than HP5 or Delta. This challenges a bit the analysis you and interneg do.

No it does not change the analysis one bit. All it does is convey that the roll film market has a set of different set of market dynamics for which Kodak elects to compete in. Clearly sheet film is a horse of a different color.

I primarily shoot sheets and in this regard the difference between TMY over TMX is quite simple. Both TMY and TMX exhibit stellar straight line density booking character so here is my observations as to why TMY is a superior emulsion over TMX.

1) Film Speed advantage TMY over TMX. While you claim speed is not a concern for you, for others it is a huge deal.

2) TMX is a very fickle film to process where rotary techniques since its inception have been considered optimal. TMY exhibits enormously greater latitude when it comes to processing this emulsion.

3) TMY does not have a UV coating whereby TMX does which is a disqualifying component for UV processes.

4) TMY has the greatest resolution of any higher speed B&W film which is a desirable component for roll and sheet film consumers.

[Pere Casals]

No it does not change the analysis one bit.

IMHO it does, a theory should explain the general case.

1) Film Speed advantage TMY over TMX. While you claim speed is not a concern for you, for others it is a huge deal.

If we simply have an IQ requirement, TMX has the same "effective" speed than TMY. If you see the graphs MTF for TMX falls from beyond 50 Lp/mm, while for TMY it falls beyond 20 Lp/mm.

The meaning of this is that I can obtain same IQ with TMX in MF than you with TMY in 4x5. Then with MF I can open two stops more than you, so we have same shutter speed. And my cost will be $0.62 per shot.

The rationale is that if there is no creative OOF/movements in the shot, say plain landscape with all in focus, if you shot TMY 4x5 then you can obtain just the same with TMX MF.

My view is that if I want IQ to shot a landscape then I use TMX, if I had to use TMY because film speed then MF TMX it's a better choice, and same shutter speed because the faster lens.

Well, true, the UV blocking TMX base, a sound pitfall.



... We buy a Sironar S because it sports 70 Lp/mm... then we use TMY with an MTF that falls beyond 20 Lp/mm ?

Note this is for practical photography conditions, both films can reach much higher Lp/mm at 1:1000 contrast, but there are no textures with that microcontrast...

[Michael Kadillak]

When you are shooting 8x10 wind continues to be an operating variable particularly in the high mountains that one needs to properly manage. Chose a colored filter and things get more challenging. For me the extra film speed is a God Send. Other times I may want to have more options when it comes to stopping moving water. Again, more options are better for me than fewer options. But if TMX works for you then have at it.

[Pere Casals]

TMY is excellent, but I find that using instead TXP or HP5 does not impose limitations, and if there is LIRF, then the RIP Acros was the best.

TMY is great, right, but it has a drawback in the resolving power vs TMX, perhaps a lot of times this is not critical, but if we cite speed advantage then we also have to cite the resolving power disadvantage.

[Michael Kadillak]

TMY is excellent, but I find that using instead TXP or HP5 does not impose limitations, and if there is LIRF, then the RIP Acros was the best.

TMY is great, right, but it has a drawback in the resolving power vs TMX, perhaps a lot of times this is not critical, but if we cite speed advantage then we also have to cite the resolving power disadvantage.

Photography is the pinnacle of giving something up to gain something else. But when you contact print any resolving issues disappear and what you get is delicious tonality and that is fine with me. Unintentionally we have deviated from the original post objectives and we have collectively made our point. Onward!

[Pere Casals]

Unintentionally we have deviated from the original post objectives and we have collectively made our point. Onward!

Yes, Michael, sometimes the off sides are also very interesting !