Request an Acros-like film from Ilford?

[Harley Goldman]

I recently emailed Ilford and asked if they had any plans to develop an Acros-like film, i.e. Delta 100 without the reciprocity issues. I got a very nice and very lengthy response that basically said they have never considered it, as no one ever pointed out a problem with Delta 100 (or their other films) or requested a film such as an Acros. Their R&D tends to driven by customer requests and since they had no requests, no R&D in that area.

Given that Fuji keeps shrinking their film menu, especially in 4x5, I would love to have a hopefully more reliable source of an Acros-like film. I love Delta 100 and use it a lot, but I frequently shoot in low light and the reciprocity characteristics are terrible. For my work, Acros is a great choice, but I worry about it going away with many of the other Fuji films that have been discontinued.

If anyone is interested in seeing Ilford develop such a film, feel free to contact them and say so. There is certainly no guarantee they would develop such a film, but it never hurts to ask en masse.

[IanG]

Some of much prefer Delta 100 to Acros. Personally I'd like to see an upgrade to HP6 :D

Ian

[Drew Wiley]

I much prefer ACROS itself. Better curve shape, recip, and special spectral sensitivity for my own kind of use. Why not just buy the real deal? What keeps a particular film alive is sales, that's all. Split the niche and there goes some of that.

[Harley Goldman]

I much prefer ACROS itself. Better curve shape, recip, and special spectral sensitivity for my own kind of use. Why not just buy the real deal? What keeps a particular film alive is sales, that's all. Split the niche and there goes some of that.

I do buy Acros. But I also bought a lot of Velvia 50 and that was still discontinued. A huge company such as Fuji runs off different metrics than a smaller company. I would guess Ilford will be in the film business long after Fuji has gotten out.

[Taija71A]

____

>> Personally I'd like to see an upgrade to HP6.
Good one Ian...

>> I much prefer ACROS itself. Better curve shape, recip, and special spectral sensitivity for my own kind of use.
Agreed in full Drew!

I too like REALLY like Fuji Acros 100 in 4x5... For exactly the three (3) reasons that you have previously stated Drew -- But especially (in my case) for the Orthopanchromatic Color Sensitivity and outstanding Reciprocity Characteristics of the film. Big Smile.
--
Personally I would like to see an Ilford FP5 (from FP4 Plus)... That is more like the old KODAK PLUS-X Pan Professional (PXT) 4x5 Film. (*See what you have now started Ian???). Just joking of course! :)
--
So there you go... Maybe we should now just go 'All Out' and petition Ilford for the following new 4x5 Films:

__________________________________


1). Ilford Delta/Acros 100
2). Ilford Delta 200
3). Ilford FP5

and also an

4). Ilford HP6 (*For 'Ian').

__________________________________

I am sure that they will be *REAL* impressed!!! LOL. :) :) :)
--
Best,

-Tim.
________

[Drew Wiley]

You might be betting on the wrong horse! Ilford just discontinued the last decent cold-toned VC paper on the market (Kentmere Fineprint). I still have time to buy
up some of the last run. But figuring that they did relatively little to promote its usage and treated it like an unwanted stepchild, there's no guarantee that they'll
keep alive some new niche at the expense of their better-known existing films. Besides, both TMax sheet films (TMX and TMY) are still in the running, and apparently doing rather well in sales, even in 8x10, given the frequency of runs lately. What I REALLY miss are the ACROS Quickloads - so convenient for backpacking (I've got
just one box left). But the orthopan look of ACROS is something unique, and not achievable with quite as much finesse using a YG filter on ordinary pan film. So if
I were to get on any bandwagon still realistic, it would be to lobby for 8x10 ACROS to get distributed here again. (Don't worry, Ilford... I still buy lots of other things you mfg).

[Taija71A]

____

Hi Drew!

>> You might be betting on the wrong horse!
I hear you Drew....

FYI, the 'Horse' that I would *Like* to see Drew is as follows (Smile):

That 'each and every' Manufacturer of LF Films that there *Ever was* in the 20th and 21st Century... Would continue to produce 'Each and Every Stock' of LF Film that they EVER produced and *** ALSO *** in Every Size imaginable (I.e. Whole Plate, Half Plate, 4x5, 5x7, 4x10, 8x10, 8x20, 11x14, 12x20, 14x17, 16x20, 20x24 Etc., etc.. etc.... 'Ad Infinitum'). You of course get the idea Drew! LOL. :)

Ain't going to happen Tim! :( :( :(
___

Phil, on another note... I (think) that Fuji Neopan ACROS 100 is still *perhaps* available at some places in Japan (*I don't shoot 8x10 at the present time)...
The problem of course is actually trying to 'order it' and then having it shipped back to North America.

Like so many things in life, it is perhaps a question of... 'How Bad Do You *REALLY* 'Want It' and perhaps 'What Price' are you willing to spend?'.

If you are still interested in the 8x10 ACROS Phil... You may want to try contacting either Dirk Rosler (dirk@japanexposures.com) or Kurt Easterwood (kurt@japanexposures.com) directly. I hear that they are both great guys!


http://www.japanexposures.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=30


Best,

-Tim.
________

[Leszek Vogt]

Would love to see 8x10 (for others) and 5x7 or 4x5 Acros type film for me. I'm with Harley on this. If they can make larger sheets....that's fine too, but I have no idea what sorts of sales they pull. Frankly, there are lots of folk that use the smaller sizes like 6x6 or 35mm, as well.

Les

[Mark Sampson]

Never mind all those other films; just give me Verichrome Pan back, but in 4x5 this time.

[Jim Noel]

Never mind all those other films; just give me Verichrome Pan back, but in 4x5 this time.

I agree. Both the original ortho and the later panchromatic emulsions were terrific, especially for skin tones.

[Bruce Watson]

Their R&D tends to driven by customer requests and since they had no requests, no R&D in that area.

Wait... Ilford / Harmon has an R&D department? But they haven't released a new film in what, 25 years? What does this alleged R&D group actually do? I'm not being facetious here, I'd like to know.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, what about MGWT paper? That's incredibly good fairly recent product, and there certain other paper tweaks they've come up with. And even thing like FP4 and
HP5 have been retweaked. ... and there's that whole paper with nothing on it division (inkjet paper), that I don't personally pay attention to, but a lot of people do.

[Taija71A]

____

>> and there's that whole paper with nothing on it division (inkjet paper).

Good one Drew!

And why does this paper 'With *NOTHING* On it'... Sometimes and 'Quite Often' cost MORE $$$ -- Then the stuff with *Something* ACTUALLY on it (i.e. like *** REAL *** 'Silver Based' Photographic Papers) :(

Like they say... 'What's up with that' ???
(*Not that I ever use Inkjet Papers)... So I really couldn't care less...
________

[SpeedGraphicMan]

I believe a Large Format photographer of today must learn to use whatever tools available to the best of his/her abilities.

Unfortunately, I do not think Acros will be around much longer, at least not here in the US.
Fuji has already eliminated a good many of its color negative stocks that were available here in the US.

I fear it is only a matter of time for Acros as well.

With many once popular films having already vanished (APX, Plus-X, Etc)
I think we should perhaps concentrate on supporting the limited but excellent products that are avialable and in so doing, insuring their future as manufactured products.

I am refuse to go back to coating dry-plates until the last B&W Large Format film has disapeared.

[Drew Wiley]

Do you actually know someone in the hierarchy of Fuji, or via some official press release, that warrants the idea that they're going to pull the plug on a popular product like ACROS? Just because some film offerings have been thinned does not automatically equate to outright exiting that line of business. Quickloads ended
because of a glitch in the proprietary packaging process that didn't warrant reinvestment. I hated to see Astia done in, but frankly, it never sold that well in the first place. Kodak dropped most of their films too, but functionally what is left behind is some very high-quality and versatile stuff that seems to be holding its own rather comfortably. You gotta pick your battles. ... but that doesn't mean outright surrender. Fuji is still very active in coating updated RA4 papers, for example. But like many Japanese companies, sometimes things get "lost in translation" between the Japanese hierarchy and numbskull US distribution.

[Drew Wiley]

.... but to reply to the other comment, selling inkjet paper is a lot like selling plain bottled water. It's just plain profitable (though certainly not devoid of competition).
High quality paper is inherently expensive... but come on ... just a little sizing... no silver or gelatin. And inks!!!! The public has become totally indoctrinated that you
just have to have the latest and greatest electronic gadgets or your life will come to an end... your dog will bite you, your wife will leave, you'll have no friends or
social life... and to refer to a thread in the Lounge, you'll have nothing to do behind the wheel except actually keep your vehicle in the proper lane... But look at the
bright side ... you don't even have to unhook your high-fructose corn syrup IV drip to print pictures anymore. In fact, you don't even need to take pictures any
more... you can just ... whatever... (end of the day for me ... gotta unhook my own drip line and get to a real darkroom to restore my sanity)....

[Oren Grad]

Wait... Ilford / Harmon has an R&D department? But they haven't released a new film in what, 25 years? What does this alleged R&D group actually do? I'm not being facetious here, I'd like to know.

What have they been doing the last 25 years?

Off the top of my head:

Films: Delta 100 Pro, Delta 400 Pro, Delta 3200 Pro
Silver halide papers: MGIVRCD, MGIVFB, MGRCWT, MGFBWT, MGRCCT, MG Art 300*, Galerie Digital papers*, Harman Direct Positive RC/FB*
Chemicals - selenium toner*, WT developer*, CT developer*
Inkjet papers: various*
Transfer of Kentmere production to Mobberley*
Exploring non-photographic applications of specialist coating and chemistry capabilities*
Quality control on current production

I've marked with an asterisk those items that IIRC have occurred since Harman emerged from the Ilford reorganization in 2004-5.

PS: I've left out products like the Harman TiTAN and Obscura cameras, single-use HP5+/XP2S cameras, etc., that don't draw on their emulsion and chemistry capabilities.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I'd rather they came up with a replacement for efke's IR film in 4x5. Now that's a void worth filling!

[Roger Cole]

I'd rather they came up with a replacement for efke's IR film in 4x5. Now that's a void worth filling!

That was discussed on APUG and Simon said they could easily do it but doubted the market. He took it to the board who considered it but agreed - not enough market for it. :(

[Curt]

I'd like to see them make an Efke 25 and supply it in retail outlets in all sizes from 35mm through 20x24. Oh wait! Wrong thread!
I'd like to see them make a Pan F+ and supply it in retail outlets in all sized from 35mm through 20x24.

Or like Harley, Acros like film but in sizes up to and including ULF.

With that said how's about Pan F+ in sizes up to 11x14? Or at least up to 8x10! Or at least 5x7! Ok, how about just 4x5?

Customer driven, ok.....

[Curt]

I'd rather they came up with a replacement for efke's IR film in 4x5. Now that's a void worth filling!

I second that thought!

Sometimes I see R&D as reject and discourage.

[IanG]

Wait... Ilford / Harmon has an R&D department? But they haven't released a new film in what, 25 years? What does this alleged R&D group actually do? I'm not being facetious here, I'd like to know.

What about the two Kentmere films, and also their Ilford 100 & 400 films made for export ? Then there was the completely new range of Kentmere papers, also Art300. Then there's the products they make for 3rd parties.

Not bad for a small company with a small R&D department.

Ian

[Ken Lee]

Setting aside the issues of reciprocity and fine grain, what is the appeal or advantage of orthochromatic film: can we get the same effect by shooting through a blue or cool-colored filter ?

With ACROS, was orthochromaticity an unfortunate consequence of the desire for fine grain and excellent reciprocity characteristics - or do some consider it an advantage in its own right ?

[LuisR]

I do buy Acros. But I also bought a lot of Velvia 50 and that was still discontinued. A huge company such as Fuji runs off different metrics than a smaller company. I would guess Ilford will be in the film business long after Fuji has gotten out.

Absolutely right about the metrics; this is why they got out of manufacturing large format lenses and there is less technology in LF lenses than in lenses used in digital "photography". However I am not sure Ilford will be around after Fuji has left the film business. I am not sure how large or small a business Harman is but I question whether the film side of photography has even stabilized its sales or if they just continue to drop. I would be curious for someone to post some figures in this regard. What I find truly deplorable is that there is no U.S. manufacturer making B&W film on a small scale. Perhaps its just too capital intensive a business for a small cottage type industry to enter. They would not even need retail distribution as they could sell directly off a website and if they produced a quality product with the properties mentioned here, I am sure they would find support from most of us in this forum.

[Drew Wiley]

Ken - ACROS is not ortho, it's orthopan, meaning it does see some red, but is more sensitive to green than ordinary films. For me, it gives a more natural look to
the light in the mtns and desert in particular. ... more buoyant, luminous, and less heavy. You can take a light yellow-green filter like a Hoya XO and get a similar
look, but besides lowering your speed a stop and perhaps slightly affecting sharpness due to the presence of a filter, the look is not identical. Like I already stated,
ACROS seems to do it with a little extra finesse. It also has excellent edge acutance for a fine-grained film, along with a reasonably long straight line, and of course, freedom from recip failure. Delta has a longer toe; TMax100 has a steeper toe and longer straight-line at the bottom end, but relatively poor edge acutance despite fine grain. There are of course both darkroom and digital means to sharpen edges or or make modest curve adjustments, but it is just easier and inherently better if the film does this itself in the first place. In other words, if ACROS ever disappeared from the market, it wouldn't stop me from taking analogous
shots; but being available, I'd prefer to do with it ACROS.

[Drew Wiley]

Luis - to a very real degree, making LF lenses became unprofitable simply because they last a long time and now there's a glut of them on the used market. Film is
an expendable. But the big users of things like transparency film, esp studios, have had to bow to the "need it yesterday" streamlined workflow of the era, and have understandably shifted a lot of their needs to high-end digital. Amateur color photography is more oriented to the expendable "latest and greateset" (but otherwise flimsy and junky) mentality driving the entire consumer electronics industry. What is seriously filling the void right now is black and white printing (which has quite a following), and the significant improvement of color neg film and RA4 paper in recent years. And Kodak's exit from a big wheeler-dealer corp to suststainable mfg of a smaller volume of a limited number of very versatile, popular films (both color and b&w) is a very good sign at this point. Harman seems to be doing quite well too. So all this doom and gloom talk starts getting pretty annoying in the face of actual facts. Yeah... I've got my own gripes about one or two
favorite products disappearing... but this has been going on long before the advent of digital photography, and readjusting to a new norm is the norm of photographic practice. You always want to be a step ahead, regardless. But sheet film per se is hardly in danger of extinction any time soon. Create a vacuum and someone will fill it.

[Ken Lee]

Ken - ACROS is not ortho, it's orthopan, meaning it does see some red, but is more sensitive to green than ordinary films. For me, it gives a more natural look to
the light in the mtns and desert in particular. ... more buoyant, luminous, and less heavy. You can take a light yellow-green filter like a Hoya XO and get a similar
look, but besides lowering your speed a stop and perhaps slightly affecting sharpness due to the presence of a filter, the look is not identical. Like I already stated,
ACROS seems to do it with a little extra finesse. It also has excellent edge acutance for a fine-grained film, along with a reasonably long straight line, and of course, freedom from recip failure. Delta has a longer toe; TMax100 has a steeper toe and longer straight-line at the bottom end, but relatively poor edge acutance despite fine grain. There are of course both darkroom and digital means to sharpen edges or or make modest curve adjustments, but it is just easier and inherently better if the film does this itself in the first place. In other words, if ACROS ever disappeared from the market, it wouldn't stop me from taking analogous
shots; but being available, I'd prefer to do with it ACROS.

Excellent - Thank you !

[Bruce Watson]

What have they been doing the last 25 years?

Off the top of my head:

Films: Delta 100 Pro, Delta 400 Pro, Delta 3200 Pro

I thought the Delta line dated to the mid-late 1980s. Which would be... 25 years.

I'll give you the papers and some of the chemistry. But film is what we capture with. We can make papers (the platinum / palladium guys seem to anyway) by hand with varying levels of competence. But making the capture medium -- the film, ain't something individuals can do in a darkroom, with much of any level of competence. That's what we really need them for IMHO. And they've been missing in action on the film front for decades. How old is HP5+ anyway?

I'll shut up now. I'm clearly in a grumpy mood. Sigh...

[IanG]

How old is HP5+ anyway?


Is it's age important :D

I shot HP3 (&FP3) while at school although it was ex Governmenent surplus stock, nice film but HP4 was better, and when HP5 came out not many years later (1975) it was streets ahead of competitors like Tri-X. It's still an exceptionally good film and was improved slighly in 1989 as HP5 Plus.

Most of my early use of HP5 was shooting rock concert and push process, but I swithed to XP1 then XP2 (again push processed) when they were released. I neglected HP5 for many years until buying some on this forum but it's now my only film for hand held LF work with a Crown or Super Graphic, the results are outstanding, no-one can tell which images are Delta 100 & using a tripod or HP5 hand-held.

If I had to choose one film only it might well be HP5, in my eyes it's main disadvantage is it's speed, I do like slower films for my personal work (when I can use a tripod) just because I can work around the few seconds to 1/15 shutter speed range at f22.

Ian

[Oren Grad]

I thought the Delta line dated to the mid-late 1980s. Which would be... 25 years.

The Delta line was iterated to the "pro" versions, with 3200 added, in the mid-to-late 1990s.


I'll give you the papers and some of the chemistry. But film is what we capture with. We can make papers (the platinum / palladium guys seem to anyway) by hand with varying levels of competence. But making the capture medium -- the film, ain't something individuals can do in a darkroom, with much of any level of competence. That's what we really need them for IMHO.

That's an argument for why they need to keep making film, not an argument for why they need to replace current films with new ones. If anything, in today's market it's an argument for risk-aversion on their part. If it ain't broke...

Emulsion-making is voodoo; pushing the technology is not cut-and-dry. Simon Galley has told us that the reason Direct Positive RC is off the market for now is because the last coating run failed and they're still figuring out why.

[sanking]

Ken - ACROS is not ortho, it's orthopan, meaning it does see some red, but is more sensitive to green than ordinary films. For me, it gives a more natural look to
the light in the mtns and desert in particular. ... more buoyant, luminous, and less heavy. You can take a light yellow-green filter like a Hoya XO and get a similar
look, but besides lowering your speed a stop and perhaps slightly affecting sharpness due to the presence of a filter, the look is not identical. Like I already stated,
ACROS seems to do it with a little extra finesse. It also has excellent edge acutance for a fine-grained film, along with a reasonably long straight line, and of course, freedom from recip failure. Delta has a longer toe; TMax100 has a steeper toe and longer straight-line at the bottom end, but relatively poor edge acutance despite fine grain. There are of course both darkroom and digital means to sharpen edges or or make modest curve adjustments, but it is just easier and inherently better if the film does this itself in the first place. In other words, if ACROS ever disappeared from the market, it wouldn't stop me from taking analogous
shots; but being available, I'd prefer to do with it ACROS.

You would not want to use ACROS if you are making three-color separation negatives. But for a normal look in B&W ACROS is simply superb. I admit to experimenting with other films when I should have stuck with ACROS. For my work ACROS is simply the best film I have used, and for sure I have tried a bunch of them.

And on top of that, you have the very low reciprocity failure of ACROS, best of any film I have used, by far.

So why fret about a replacement from another source when you can still buy the real deal?

Sandy

[Roger Cole]

I like Acros in 120, but in 4x5 the price is just silly considering the price of FP4+ or even TMX. I would pay that if there were no less expensive alternatives. There are, so I don't.

[Brian Legge]

...however I am not sure Ilford will be around after Fuji has left the film business. I am not sure how large or small a business Harman is but I question whether the film side of photography has even stabilized its sales or if they just continue to drop...

I'm not following here. What else does Harman do outside of the film/paper/etc business? As I understand it, they are a reasonably profitable company with the ability to scale production to lower batch sizes than Kodak, etc. They seem well positioned to deal with shifting markets. I love Acros and Trix but see Ilford as having the greatest chance to be around for a long time.

[StoneNYC]

I agree with the poster who said he wanted PanF+ in sheet film, I asked Simon if he would consider that for the ULF special request run, he wouldn't consider any sheet nor 70mm in PanF+ because the base was just too thin and they (ilford/board) refuse to release a film that doesn't meet their standards even if people would buy it (which I understand, all you need is one person who doesn't know it's a special run who complains about how bad the base is and you have PR issues.

Second, I think LOOK wise, FP4+ looks more like acros than Delta100 does even if its not a T grain film like acros or Delta. That said NOTHING looks like acros100 and the reciprocity failure rate is way beyond the others.

I doubt ilford could match that 2 minute rate without serious investment in research and its not worth it for the small amount of difference it would make.

I love ilford films and with the exception of film trades and Acros, all my B&W film is ilford now. I mostly buy acros for the reciprocity, especially in 4x5 that's my only reason for buying it at those prices.

I don't know if this is true but I read somewhere that Ilford is the only film company to turn a profit (be in black instead of red) since 2001 when film sales dropped off the cliff. So no one can doubt they are poised for the long haul. They also communicate with their customers (Simon is always posting on APUG), and have openly stated they plan to support B&W film indefinitely. They also have the ULF run where try cut specialty sheet sizes with what appears to be almost no profit to them based on the numbers I've seen, just enough to cover costs.

That said, I think it's a great idea if we all sent messages to the R&D department to encourage them to research this Acros "phenomenon" with the amazing reciprocity characteristics and see what they can do to add that feature to some or all of their films. Heck they could make a new film (going with the theme) "Ilford KP2 200" or "Recip200" since giving it a but more speed could also make it more appealing as a more all around film :)

We can only dream.

OP what's the R&D contact info?

[Oren Grad]

I don't know if this is true but I read somewhere that Ilford is the only film company to turn a profit (be in black instead of red) since 2001 when film sales dropped off the cliff.

That's not quite right - that period includes the Ilford bankruptcy of 2004-2005, out of which Harman Technology emerged. But Harman's financial reports for the years from 2009-2011 show annual revenues in the range 22-23 million pounds and that the company was profitable.


OP what's the R&D contact info?

The Ilford website has a dedicated contact form for new product requests:

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/newproductrequest.asp

[StoneNYC]

That's not quite right - that period includes the Ilford bankruptcy of 2004-2005, out of which Harman Technology emerged. But Harman's financial reports for the years from 2009-2011 show annual revenues in the range 22-23 million pounds and that the company was profitable.



The Ilford website has a dedicated contact form for new product requests:

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/newproductrequest.asp

Ahh I was t clear... I said the only company to turn apricot SINCE 2001 I didn't mean EVERY YEAR I just meant at some point at least one year they did, unlike the other big film companies, this doesn't of course account for loopholes like Fuji probably "takes a loss" but still makes out even though technically in the red in their film area through creative finances, but you know what I mean. Sorry for not being clear.

[Oren Grad]

Sorry for not being clear.

No sweat. The important thing is that contact form, and the communication channel through Simon at APUG.

[Moopheus]

I like Acros in 120, but in 4x5 the price is just silly considering the price of FP4+ or even TMX. I would pay that if there were no less expensive alternatives. There are, so I don't.

The same here--I use Acros in 120, and have a stash of 100' rolls in the freezer in 35mm that I bought up when they stopped offering them. But in 4x5 it's just too much. You'd think with the recent drop in the Yen we could get a bit of a break there, but I guess not.

[LuisR]

I like Acros in 120, but in 4x5 the price is just silly considering the price of FP4+ or even TMX. I would pay that if there were no less expensive alternatives. There are, so I don't.

Could not have said it better myself.

[Drew Wiley]

I have a simple cure for those who find the cost of 4x5 ACROS prohibitive. Shoot 8x10 for awhile.

[Steve Goldstein]

This thread prompted me to look at the spectral response curves of a few films (TMY2, FP4+ and Acros) for which I have datasheets. I was quite surprised to see that the curves for TMY2 and Acros are remarkably similar, with Acros a little less responsive in the green. Both seem to be flatter across the spectrum than FP4+. Acros and TMY2 drop off strongly in the red, at nearly the same wavelength, and both lose sensitivity more rapidly, i.e. over a smaller range of wavelengths, than FP4+.

Drew, have you ever compared TMY2 with Acros in the mountains? Given the similarity of their published curves, I wonder what the actual performance is. I would check it myself, but don't expect to be in high mountains again until the summer of 2014.

I also looked at the curves of the B+W 060 and Hoya X0 filters, both of which are yellow-green. They're quite similar at shorter wavelengths, but the X0 has notably less transmission in the orange-red part of the spectrum. I'll have to get my hands on an X0 to compare with my 060. That knowledge is certainly worth the price of a roll of FP4+ 120 from the freezer.

Thanks to all for the thought-provoking comments in this thread.

[Drew Wiley]

You need to look at curves closely. What might at first appear to be merely superficial differences can make a big difference in actual application, esp when it affects
the far end of the spectrum. That's why ACROS is officially classified as an orththopan film, while TMY is classified with pan, but with the disclosure over slightly lower
blue sensitivity than previous Kodak products. There are many other significant differences between these films. TMX responds so consistently to different primary
filters that it can be used as a color separation film for tricolor printing, at least until the behaviour gets messed up by undue recip failure. I don't have time to go into the very many tests I've personally done. As far as balancing the sensitivity, TMX will resemble ACROS with the addition of an XO filter, but let me get back
to this thread in a moment per mtn and high altitude use... gotta get something else done first .........

[Drew Wiley]

OK ... in the mtns or high desert you can often get very high contrast situations with a lot of blue in the shadows. I've successfully used all the popular films in such
circumstances but obviously have favorites. With ACROS you never want to use a red filter deeper than 25 or you'll just chop off a zone of shadows, whereas a 29
can be used with a typical pan film for slightly increased effect, though one has to be very careful about readings in the deepest shadows. And TMX will allow you to
dig deeper into shadows and get nice separation than either ACROS or FP4. These latter two films also seem to require a lower speed setting than box speed. ... I
rate both of them at 50, plus any filter factor. But TMX is very different and I rate it at 100, and you have to be careful not to blow out the highlights. ... in this
respect, pyro developers are a major asset with all these films. So yes, TMY will allow everything from deep shadow detail into sparkling snow in the same scene
without resorting to muddy minus or compensating development, BUT I gave up using it for such subjects because it has rather poor edge effect compared to the
other two films. ... might look sharp under a loupe, but less so in a print. Then per FP4 ... is a little more fragile than ACROS, not quite the linearity in high contrast
scenes, a tad less sharp, and of course needs more long exp correction.... and it's a normal pan sensitivity. Of course, one getting snow and rain and mist in the
mtns too, and not every shot is going to be high contrast. So you either take a versatile film or more than one. Wonderful prints can be made with any of these;
but I personally find ACROS to be the most versatile - a little more forgiving than TMX per exposure, and with that special luminous rendition of skies and foliage.

[Keith Tapscott.]

I recently emailed Ilford and asked if they had any plans to develop an Acros-like film, i.e. Delta 100 without the reciprocity issues.

Delta 100 already has very good reciprocity, but perhaps not quite as good as Acros.

http://www.willwilson.com/articles/0403Bond_Reciprocity2.pdf

[StoneNYC]

Delta 100 already has very good reciprocity, but perhaps not quite as good as Acros.

http://www.willwilson.com/articles/0403Bond_Reciprocity2.pdf

What are you talking about, deltas reciprocity failure starts at 1/2 second... Acros100 starts at 2 minutes! That's a huge difference...

[redrockcoulee]

I have a simple cure for those who find the cost of 4x5 ACROS prohibitive. Shoot 8x10 for awhile.

True 4X5 is less expensive than 8X10. With Acros in 120 format it is much less expensive than TMAX or Delta 100 however it is much more expensive than either of those when you go to 4X5. It actually goes from the cheapest of the 3 major brands to the the most expensive going from 120 to 4X5.

[Harley Goldman]

Delta 100 already has very good reciprocity, but perhaps not quite as good as Acros.

http://www.willwilson.com/articles/0403Bond_Reciprocity2.pdf

The times listed in this article are far more forgiving (shorter) than any others I have come across. Keith, have you tested them and found them reasonably accurate?

[Drew Wiley]

Delta has a completely different personality than ACROS in several respects anyway - different curve (more toe), different spectral sensitivity. Speed and grain similar. As far as I know, there are no close contenders to ACROS in its long exp characteristics.