Kodak's new T-Max 400 [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

View Full Version : Kodak's new T-Max 400

steve simmons

9-Oct-2007, 08:29

keith english

9-Oct-2007, 08:33

Shoot-I just ordered 50 sheets of the old new 400 tmax. Having gotten back into 4x5 I decided to standardize on t-max 400 for just this reason. I figured Kodak would continue to improve it, and would be available for a long time. Only problem is Atlanta stores don't stock it-only tri-X 320.

steve simmons

9-Oct-2007, 08:38

The dev times for the new version are supposed to be very close +/- 30 seconds.

We will get samples as soon as we can.

steve

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 08:43

Kodak announced today an improved version of T-Max 400. This new version will work its way down into the US market in December and in Europe by Jan according to predictions.

It is supposed to be sharper and finer grained without any change in film speed. The sheet film version will not have a UV coating.

Samples will be given out at the Photo Plus show in NYC next week.

steve simmons

A small group of devout T Max 400 users have been testing the new film in rolls for the past three weeks and the results have been quite favorable. The new Estar base for sheet film is just now being produced so I hope to have some sample sheets to generate film curves shortly. We held up the announcement of the new TMY ULF sheet film deal until we could evaluate the new film and make sure that there were no surprises. At this stage it appears that the only thing that has changed is the improvement in grain structure. I am pleased that Kodak is continuing to be proactive in taking the lead to improve their B&W films as this is a strong signal that they are interested in the long term of this product segment.

As far as the non UV coating on the sheet film, I want to thank Scott Disabato for going to the matt on this one. We previously pleaded to him that all of the alt process folks would not be able to purchase this film if they did not keep it out of the new formulation and management listened, which is wonderful news. The compromise is that all roll film (120 and 35mm) will have the UV coating present. Such is life.

Cheers!

Matus Kalisky

9-Oct-2007, 09:06

Tmax 400 + Pyrocat HD is becomming my favourite combination. It is nice to see it's being worked on.

But still - what is the UV coating good for? I can imagine longevity but otherwise... ?

Daniel Grenier

9-Oct-2007, 09:15

..... We held up the announcement of the new TMY ULF sheet film deal. .....

And when might that be, Michael? Looking forward to some 8x10 and 7x17.

Sal Santamaura

9-Oct-2007, 09:17

...what is the UV coating good for?... ?I suspect it's intended to minimize focus shift due to enlarger lens lateral chromatic abberation when printing on variable contrast papers.

davidb

9-Oct-2007, 09:23

Yeah...what Sal said.

Jan Pedersen

9-Oct-2007, 09:37

Interesting news, have no problems with grain in the "old" version but look forward to try the new.
Anyway the new boxes will be labeled so that it is easy to differentiate between new and old?

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 09:39

Tmax 400 + Pyrocat HD is becomming my favourite combination. It is nice to see it's being worked on.

But still - what is the UV coating good for? I can imagine longevity but otherwise... ?

I was told that the UV coating is desired by production engineers for emulsion quality control issues. Could be relating to the stresses that are imposed to wound roll film that are not present in sheets that are laying flat in a box. Whatever the reasons all we need to be concerned about is that this coating is not present in sheet film.

The ULF deal paperwork contracts are ready for signature as we have found a fabulous sponsor post J&C that I feel will put everyone at ease from a transactional perspective. We also want to reach out to all formats and insure that no matter what size sheet film you shoot, we will set up a very attainable procedure to get it cut and packaged. This time in 25 sheet correct sized boxes. We will also not be doing the whole deal en masse, but spreading out the orders to every two to three months throughout the year. Easier for everyone including Kodak.

Cheers!

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 09:41

Interesting news, have no problems with grain in the "old" version but look forward to try the new.
Anyway the new boxes will be labeled so that it is easy to differentiate between new and old?

There will be emulsion designation numbers on the front of the box and also different covers labels that will allow easy differentiation between the two products.

Hugo Zhang

9-Oct-2007, 09:54

Michael,

"no matter what size sheet film you shoot, we will set up a very attainable procedure to get it cut and packaged."

I will be interested in a few boxes of 9 1/2 x 20".

Thanks.
Hugo

Sal Santamaura

9-Oct-2007, 10:03

I suspect it's intended to minimize focus shift due to enlarger lens lateral chromatic abberation when printing on variable contrast papers.Wrong, although that might be a side benefit.

This .pdf

http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/professional/products/films/bw/bwFilmQAs.pdf?id=0.2.22.14.17.14.6&lc=en

answers a series of questions, including the reason for a UV barrier on 35mm and 120-format films: "...to prevent inadvertent backside static exposure."

...get it cut and packaged. This time in 25 sheet correct sized boxes...Interestingly, the .pdf says Kodak is replacing 50-sheet boxes with 10-sheet boxes for 8x10 (Tri-X too).

Michael Alpert

9-Oct-2007, 10:05

Michael,

Thanks for the information. If Kodak does not make the new film available in 5x7 as a stock itiem, will you be contracting to have this film cut in 5x7?

agprint

9-Oct-2007, 10:16

Indeed, Kodak did announce a new and improved T-MAX 400 film this morning. I personally find this exciting news, as it demonstrates that film is still “alive” at Kodak, and in fact they have been working on improving their existing silver halide emulsions.

I've had the opportunity to use this film extensively, in 120 size, for the past month. Though my primary film, since its introduction, has been Kodak Professional T-MAX 100, I have also used T-MAX 400 when needed for extremely low light situations, or when wind or other source of movement is a concern. In my experience the updated version of the T-MAX 400 film is noticeably finer grain than its predecessor. Kodak states that the new Professional T-MAX 400 is "now the world's sharpest, finest grain 400 speed black and white film."

Here is a link to the web page where you can find the Kodak press release announcing the new T-MAX 400 film:
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQueri...requestid=6620

I have been processing the new T-MAX 400 120 film in D-76 1+1 for 7 minutes at 68©F with manual agitation for 5 seconds every 30 seconds. This processing procedure has produced negatives of excellent quality for enlarging with a diffusion light source. The grain structure has smoothness that to my eye I have never experienced in a film of this speed.

Kodak will be distributing free samples of the film (35mm size only) to those attending PhotoPlus Expo in New York City, October 18-20, at the Jacob Javits Center. In addition, Kodak is presenting a panel discussion, "Black and White Photography in the 21st Century," on Friday, October 19th from 3:00 - 4:45 PM. This event is free to all those attending the PhotoPlus Expo show, and will be held in the Presentation Theater in he Jacob Javits Center. I'm pleased to be a part of this panel discussion, along with photographers Michael Crouser, Liz Gilbert, and Kristen Ashburn. All of us will be discussing our current work and our decisions in terms of why we work in black and white photography. There will be a drawing at the conclusion of the event, where attendees will have the opportunity to win silver gelatin prints from each of the four panel members. If you're attending PhotoPlus, it would be great to see you at the panel discussion.

In addition, I will be in the Kodak booth to visit with people and sign books at the following times:

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18
11:00 am - 2:00 pm

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 19
10:30 am - 12:00 pm

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 20
10:00 am - 1:00 pm

I hope to have the opportunity to make some new friends from among forum members, as well as visit with old friends during the PhotoPlus Expo.

I'm on the road traveling right now, so I won't have much access to the forum or email until after I return from PhotoPlus Expo. However, my assistant will receive emails, and pass them on to me: info@johnsexton.com

John Sexton

Jay W

9-Oct-2007, 10:24

It's really good news to hear that Kodak is producing a new B&W film. Surprising, but good. The other thing mentioned was an Estar base. Hmm....that was one reason for discontinuing Tech Pan.

Jay

evan clarke

9-Oct-2007, 11:20

Jeez, I have my Tmax 400 in Pyrocat MC tuned up really well!! I'll give it a shot but now need to think about stocking the freezer. Evan Clarke

sanking

9-Oct-2007, 11:35

Jeez, I have my Tmax 400 in Pyrocat MC tuned up really well!! I'll give it a shot but now need to think about stocking the freezer. Evan Clarke

My initial testing of the new TMAX-400 in Pyrocat-HD (120 format) suggests that development times should be similar to the old TMAX-400 for a similar CI. I plan to do BTZS testing of the new film just as soon as I get some sheet film.

I agree with previous posts about the sharpness and grain of the new film. It definitely appears to be an improvement over the old film.

Sandy King

evan clarke

9-Oct-2007, 12:31

Sandy,
I can't say enough good about your work on this Pyrocat. The first Tmax 400 negs I did in the MC just took my breath away, they really sparkle..Thanks very much..Evan Clarke

Ed Richards

9-Oct-2007, 13:42

Any word on ReadyLoads with the new film?

Oren Grad

9-Oct-2007, 13:51

The other thing mentioned was an Estar base. Hmm....that was one reason for discontinuing Tech Pan.

Kodak sheet films are all on ESTAR. Ilford sheet films are on a polyester base as well.

John Kasaian

9-Oct-2007, 14:15

That Kodak is still working on it's sheet films is very encouraging. I don't know about the 10 sheet boxes though (now that I've learned to love the 50 sheet boxes) Since I'm underemployed at present I'd be more than happy to experiment with all the Tmax the "Great Yellow Father in Rochester" would care to send me :)

Nick_3536

9-Oct-2007, 14:24

Interestingly, the .pdf says Kodak is replacing 50-sheet boxes with 10-sheet boxes for 8x10 (Tri-X too).

Yuck. I'd hope for at least 25 sheet boxes. Or is Kodak implying that a 10 sheet box will now cost what a 50 sheet box used to?

10 sheets might be okay if there was a local shop I could walk into and pickup a box any time I want but there isn't. That means I'll be mail ordering. With 10 sheet boxes I'd end up ordering 10 boxes? Paying for shipping on 10 boxes. Plus the waste. Plus I'm sure five ten sheet boxes will cost more then one fifty sheet box. What happens if the retailer has two different date codes? Do I end up having to use half a 10 sheet box from each for testing? :rolleyes:

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 15:04

Any word on ReadyLoads with the new film?

Kodak has made several attempts to use this film in a Ready Load and I was told that it simply did not meet their stringent manufacturing criteria due to a propensity for static electricity occuring. No efforts are being made at this time to try to solve this problem.

Cheers!

sanking

9-Oct-2007, 15:09

I was told that the UV coating is desired by production engineers for emulsion quality control issues. Could be relating to the stresses that are imposed to wound roll film that are not present in sheets that are laying flat in a box. Whatever the reasons all we need to be concerned about is that this coating is not present in sheet film.

Cheers!

Alternative printers should be very thankful that Michael Kadillak brought the UV coating issue to the attention of Kodak and kept it on the front burner. If not, this great film would be essentially useless for printing with alternative processes, as is TMAX-100.

Sandy King

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 15:11

Yuck. I'd hope for at least 25 sheet boxes. Or is Kodak implying that a 10 sheet box will now cost what a 50 sheet box used to?

10 sheets might be okay if there was a local shop I could walk into and pickup a box any time I want but there isn't. That means I'll be mail ordering. With 10 sheet boxes I'd end up ordering 10 boxes? Paying for shipping on 10 boxes. Plus the waste. Plus I'm sure five ten sheet boxes will cost more then one fifty sheet box. What happens if the retailer has two different date codes? Do I end up having to use half a 10 sheet box from each for testing? :rolleyes:

We have requested and received preliminary approval for 25 sheets per box for the special ULF sheet film deal. Any decision as to how Kodak will package their LF sheet films is independent of what we are targeting. And yes, 5x7 will be included in the ULF sheet film deal. Another reality in today's sheet film market is that there will need to be some established minimum number of boxes of each format in order for it to be economical for Kodak to cut. Two boxes of any irregular size are impractical to expect. However, you have the option of cutting down 12x20.

Annie M.

9-Oct-2007, 15:42

Oren Grad

9-Oct-2007, 15:55

So far there has been no 7x11 cut by either Kodak or Ilford

Ilford did cut 7x11 this year. I bought several boxes of HP5 Plus. Just loaded my holders yesterday, in fact.

So far as I know, 7x11 will be included as an option next time around as well. This year, as in the past, there was some confusion about minimum orders required. But in the end, in a (much appreciated!) gesture of support for the LF community, Harman management decided to cut all orders received.

Annie M.

9-Oct-2007, 16:06

Oren... Damn! If I had stepped up to bat I would be doing the same thing... instead of the various off square shapes that I end up with cutting in the dark.

Hugo Zhang

9-Oct-2007, 16:31

Michael,

Let me know what is the minimum order size for 9 1/2 x 20".

Thanks.

Michael Kadillak

9-Oct-2007, 16:32

'Another reality in today's sheet film market is that there will need to be some established minimum number of boxes of each format in order for it to be economical for Kodak to cut'

Michael... when it is extablished could you please post the mimimum number of 25 sheet boxes for a production run of oh... say...7x11. So far there has been no 7x11 cut by either Kodak or Ilford, I think part of the reason may be that we do not have any idea what the minimum is. I had assumed the number was quite high so I never bothered to order thinking the minimum would most likely not be met, so I just kept on happily butchering 11x14.

Cheers & thanks... Annie

We have put together a creative marketing plan to accomodate the individuals that shoot any particular format and will roll this out to everyone interested as soon as we get this contract with the new sponsor signed with Kodak. The introduction of the new T Max 400 set us back a few weeks since we wanted to make absolutely sure that the improvements that Kodak decided to make with TMY actually improved the film and not the other way around. Now that we have concluded with a fair amount of certainty that this is a very positive event, we will be proceeding forward as quickly as possible. I also want to have someone like Sandy King do some sensitometric film testing and I also want to verify the marvelous reciprocity characteristics that we have come to love with this excellent emulsion have not changed as well.

We have requested that Kodak hold their price from the last sheet film deal and we are waiting on what we hope is a favorable response. I believe Annie that you will be pleased at the prospects of gaining access to TMY in your desired format when the time comes. I will leave it at that for now. Behind the scenes we are pluggin away to make access to TMY in ULF sizes (and 5x7) a regular business event to the point where you can pick up the phone and order more as a stock item.

Cheers!

John Kasaian

9-Oct-2007, 19:28

FWIW I think 10 sheet boxes are a big mistake for B&W sheet film---Who wants to be paying for packaging rather than film? 25 sheet boxes are the minimum I think most people would accept unless perhaps, it is a very expensive color or ULF format.

Joseph O'Neil

9-Oct-2007, 19:36

Ah man, what great night - I just picked up a 24" RD artar at an auction and now I get home and read about new Tmax! Now all I need is a new camera to fit the lens on. :)

Until then, I got my Visa card ready, first guy who has 100 sheet, 4x5 Tmax in stock gets, the order. :)
joe

Alan Davenport

9-Oct-2007, 19:47

"...to prevent inadvertent backside static exposure."

As I recall from my childhood, it was my static that frequently resulted in my backside being exposed. What I wouldn't have given for a UV barrier when I was 8...

D. Bryant

10-Oct-2007, 06:25

We have put together a creative marketing plan ...

We have requested that Kodak hold their price ...

Who is the 'we' here?

Thanks,

Don Bryant

Annie M.

10-Oct-2007, 06:53

Who is the 'we' here?...

Pluralis Majestatis... Michael is a prince for putting this together.

Michael Kadillak

10-Oct-2007, 07:05

Who is the 'we' here?

Thanks,

Don Bryant

The "WE" is the ULF and LF community that I have decided to represent along with the corporate sponsor who has so graciously agreed to assist us all in this endevour.

I am not very good at bitching about what we do not have because at the end of the day that will not put quality film in my ULF and LF holders. I would rather channel my energy into something positive and this is the task I have at the moment.

When the deal is made public with all of the details are spelled out, I will be looking for the others within our group that like this film to consider making a purchase as that will be the sealing of the deal going forward. We are all in this together to insure that we access to the highest quality sheet film available well into the future.

Thanks for your kind words Annie.

Cheers!

Ted Felton

10-Oct-2007, 13:43

Another question: does this mean that there is a change in 100 Tmax planned for the future?

Ted

Michael Kadillak

10-Oct-2007, 14:10

Another question: does this mean that there is a change in 100 Tmax planned for the future?

Ted

Kodak has the technology to accomplish this if they chose to do so but T Max 100 is already as sharp as a hand full of razor blades. It would be trying to put more shine on an already polished diamond. I was told that they are going to leave it as it is.

Cheers!

Ed Richards

10-Oct-2007, 14:25

My hope is this will let me move from 100 to 400 for everything. It is already close, and I love the range of 400.

John Kasaian

10-Oct-2007, 15:24

My hope is this will let me move from 100 to 400 for everything. It is already close, and I love the range of 400.

Ed,

400 Tmax is a wonderful film and if what Kodak says is true it will be even better. These are exciting times!:D

I still don't like the idea of a 10 sheet box though:eek:

Michael Kadillak

10-Oct-2007, 15:36

Ed,

400 Tmax is a wonderful film and if what Kodak says is true it will be even better. These are exciting times!:D

I still don't like the idea of a 10 sheet box though:eek:

Agree. I like 25 sheets as a middle of the road compromise. I will mention this to Kodak.

Brian K

10-Oct-2007, 15:48

Kodak has the technology to accomplish this if they chose to do so but T Max 100 is already as sharp as a hand full of razor blades. It would be trying to put more shine on an already polished diamond. I was told that they are going to leave it as it is.

Cheers!

Making Tmax 100 finer grained and higher resolving is something that I would wholeheartedly endorse, especially in roll film. I certainly hope that Kodak decides to improve this film, before Fuji improves Acros and Kodak falls behind.

sog1927

11-Oct-2007, 13:23

I'm sorry to hear this, since I also shoot a lot of MF (and recently had my grandfather's IIIf-s serviced by Focal Point, so I might shoot some casual 35 as well). An improved TMX might be overkill for LF, but some of us would very much appreciate it in smaller formats.

Steve

Kodak has the technology to accomplish this if they chose to do so but T Max 100 is already as sharp as a hand full of razor blades. It would be trying to put more shine on an already polished diamond. I was told that they are going to leave it as it is.

Cheers!

sog1927

11-Oct-2007, 13:28

I wonder if all the recent surveys showing a continued preference for film (at least for some kinds of work) influenced the release of this film. It would be nice to think that Kodak has started listening again.

Steve

Vaughn

11-Oct-2007, 13:36

Michael Kadillak

11-Oct-2007, 18:14

Is T Max 100 sheet film going to remain with its UV blocking layer?

Vaughn

Don't take it personally but Yes. I do not see Kodak making a change to take out the UV layer on T Max 100 anytime soon since very few people have expressed any desire for this to take place.

As long as we are on the subject I would like everyone to appreciate the fact that for Kodak to accomodate our request for the new T Max 400 sheet film to not have the UV coating they are doing a separate emulsion coating run at a considerable incremental internal cost. Kodak did not have to do it but they stepped up to the plate to accomodate the alt process and Azo photographers and anyone else that uses a UV light source for their printing process. To say that I was elated that they accomodated us would be a serious understatement.

Cheers!

Nicholas F. Jones

12-Oct-2007, 03:12

Another vote for a 25 sheet box. And I for one would like to see 5x7 available at online suppliers with no minimum number of boxes requirement--as Tri-X and Tmax100 are now.

Robert A. Zeichner

12-Oct-2007, 04:21

It seems to me that every 10 sheet 4x5 box I've seen from Kodak was about the same thickness as a 25 sheet box. Shouldn't this simply be an issue of how many sheets they decide to load into the box? I'm certainly in favor of a 25 sheet box of 5x7. This makes life a lot easier for me in that I'm not having to thaw a 50 sheet box just to extract half the contents. It also makes exposed film management in the field a bit easier (more, thinner boxes to divide up different days work or different development requirements).

Jan Pedersen

12-Oct-2007, 06:14

25 sheets yes, 10 is just to few.
Another thing i would really appreciate is a longer film envelope. Kodaks film envelopes are just to short, when cut open it is difficult to cover up remaining film and i am always worried that film will get fogged. Perhaps to much to ask but thought i should throw it out there.

John Bowen

12-Oct-2007, 07:38

Count me as another who would prefer a box size larger than 10 sheets. If they want to do 10 sheet boxes, then please keep a larger box available too. Taking 25 10 sheet boxes on a photo trip seems like such a waste.

Gene McCluney

12-Oct-2007, 08:17

10 sheets boxes are fine for color film, but for b/w, I too favor 25 sheet boxes, as well as the standard 50 sheet boxes.

12-Oct-2007, 09:16

25 or 50...

C

Dan Schmidt

12-Oct-2007, 09:16

how about 24 sheets per box or 26?

Having an odd number of sheets always seemed silly since we are mostly loading double sided holders.

Tyler Boley

12-Oct-2007, 10:51

I just want to say I'm so thrilled this may come to pass, I don't care how many sheets per box.
Gimme that 5x7 TMY!!!
To everyone involved, thank you for this.
Tyler

eddie

13-Oct-2007, 04:40

i am in! i want some. 10 sheetsis too small....how about 100 or 200 sheet boxes!?!?!!?!?

thanks kodak and all involved.....i will get some from the javits center........

eddie

Gary Tarbert

21-Oct-2007, 03:35

Put my vote in for 25 sheet box ,anyone using the old film ever push it to 1600 with good results .cheers gary

TimRoscoe

21-Oct-2007, 06:56

This is great news. I have been using Ilford Delta 100 exclusively for two years now and have been very happy. But everything I have heard about this new Tmax is interesting enough that I would like to get some and try it out. Everything

E X C E P T 10 sheets per box, that is.

This is insulting. I will not even try it out - not even if a sample is available for free (I would never buy it so why waste the time) unless they prove that they are paying attention. Frankly I think all 4x5" film should only be avail in 50 sheet and 250 sheet boxes, but that's just me.

Gordon Moat

21-Oct-2007, 09:53

. . . . . . anyone using the old film ever push it to 1600 with good results .cheers gary

I have, but with the 35mm version, not with 4x5. I actually felt the results had better contrast and tonality than Ilford Delta 3200 shot at ISO 1600.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio