Tmax 100 vs Tmax 400

[jrshupper]

I am looking for some advice about these 2 films. I had been using Fuji Acros 100 Quickloads for a long time, and have unfortunately run out of them. I am about to go to Acadia Maine to shoot that beautiful place again. I want to take just 1 film (and cut film holders now!!!). I will be photographing in all sorts of light and times of day of course. Is there that much difference between these 2 films??

Thanks in advance to all.

John Shuptrine

www.johnshuptrine.com

[dentkimterry]

Why not keep using Acros since you know it well? It's available in 4x5 sheets.

Terry

[jrshupper]

Thanks Terry---I want to try something new I guess. I must say however, that Fuji Acros is a wonderful film!

John

www.johnshuptrine.com

[Gem Singer]

Fuji Acros 100 and T-Max 100 are very similar films.

If you want to try something new, try the new T-max 400.

[memorris]

The main differences between TMax 100 and 400 is that the 400 is a bit more contrasty and it does not respond quite as well to + and minus development adjustments. I use it frequently but tend to fall back to 100 because it is a bit easier to control.

[Jay DeFehr]

For me, the biggest differences between Acros and TMX are spectral sensitivity (Acros is orthopan, and TMX is extended red), and reciprocity. Acros requires no adjustment up to 20 seconds. Amazing. As good as these films are, TMY-2 is king, and the best all-purpose film ever made, in my opinion.

[jnantz]

if you are doing any sort of bright light / uv light source printing
i would use tmy. tmx, even if not using it for uv / alternative process printing
can give you long exposure times.

i have a series of portraits i took same time of day same camera, souped at the same time ...
and printed out side by side. the contact prints/ proofs were made with ilford rc paper and a 300watt bulb.
the tmx film took between 100 and 120 seconds / print
the tmy took between 3 and 5 seconds / print.

if i had to choose between tmax 100 and 400, i would not hesitate and pick tmy 400.

[Jim Noel]

TMY has a built in UV filter which makes printing times for most alt processes inordinately long, or causes them to not print at all.

[Bruce Watson]

... TMY-2 is king, and the best all-purpose film ever made, in my opinion.

+1. When I got TMY-2 dialed in, I quit using all other B&W films. No point in carting them around if you aren't going to use them.

[Oren Grad]

TMY has a built in UV filter which makes printing times for most alt processes inordinately long, or causes them to not print at all.

Other way around - it's TMX (T-Max 100) that has the UV block.

[Rayt]

Which 400 film do you recommend for contact printing? And which commonly off the shelf available paper do you recommend for that purpose?

[Ken Lee]

(Acros is orthopan, and TMX is extended red)

By orthopan, are you referring to the film mentioned in this article (http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00FfoW) ?

If not, what do you mean please ?

[Drew Wiley]

TM100, TM400, and ACROS are very different films, each with a distinct personality of
its own. For one thing, ACROS is orthopan, which give it a different spectral sensitivity
from the TMax films. In terms of shadow exposure, it's even slower than TM100 - I
personally rate it at 50 for PMK. For outdoor work per se, I don't particularly care for
TM100 due to the poor edge effect and tendency of the highlights to block up. TM400
has to be enlarged significantly to show grain, and at 400 speed is a wonderful outdoor
film with a reasonably long straight line, allowing good capture of both shadow and
highlight values. Sometimes, however, the orthopan quality of ACROS gives a more
natural rendering of foliage and clouds, I think, without having to resort to a green
filter. Good to experiment with all of these films to find out the parameters of each.

[Brian C. Miller]

For one thing, ACROS is orthopan, which give it a different spectral sensitivity from the TMax films. ... Sometimes, however, the orthopan quality of ACROS gives a more natural rendering of foliage and clouds, I think, without having to resort to a green filter. Good to experiment with all of these films to find out the parameters of each.

Here's the PDF datasheet for Neopan Acros 100 (http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/NeopanAcros100.pdf). And here is the datasheet for Kodak 100 TMax (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4016/f4016.pdf). Both of them have a dip at 500nm, but both go from 400nm to appx 650nm. According to the spectral graph, TMax has a bit more blue sensitivity.

The Acros film is probably reacting nicely to how you are developing it.

[Andrew O'Neill]

The main differences between TMax 100 and 400 is that the 400 is a bit more contrasty and it does not respond quite as well to + and minus development adjustments.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with this comment. TMY-2 is one of the most responsive films to +/- development out there, according to my data and use in the field. It is also one of the best films for alt printing and has great reciprocity characteristics. I shoot it in 4x5 and 8x10.

[Ed Richards]

I do plus and minus development with TMY-2 and find it works well. But I am scanning, not printing on silver, so I do not need as extreme compensation as you might need for silver. I find it to have relatively low contrast, in that I get great shadow detail while not blowing out the highlights. That was my primary reason for switching, but I sure appreciate both the speed and that it has less reciprocity failure than Tmx 100. TMY-2 image, normal development, pretty wide light range:

http://www.epr-art.com/galleries/b4a-la-ca-churches/photos/1863.jpg

[Jay DeFehr]

Here's the PDF datasheet for Neopan Acros 100 (http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/NeopanAcros100.pdf). And here is the datasheet for Kodak 100 TMax (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4016/f4016.pdf). Both of them have a dip at 500nm, but both go from 400nm to appx 650nm. According to the spectral graph, TMax has a bit more blue sensitivity.

The Acros film is probably reacting nicely to how you are developing it.

Thanks for the link, Brian. I should look at these things more carefully before I post. I've read that Acros is an orthopan film so many times, I must have tricked my eyes into seeing it in my prints! According to the graphs, TMX and Acros are essentially similar. I've always thought TMX had extended red sensitivity, too, which doesn't appear to be the case. Here's what Kodak has to say about the spectral sensitivity of TMX:


The blue sensitivity of KODAK PROFESSIONAL
T-MAX Films is slightly less than that of other Kodak
panchromatic black-and-white films. This enables the
response of these films to be closer to the response of the
human eye. Therefore, blues may be recorded as slightly
darker tones with these films—a more natural rendition.



I learn (or unlearn) something new every day!

[Drew Wiley]

Brian - you might want to look at those spectrograms a little more closely. ACROS
drops like a rock before 650nm, while TM100 has some degree of sensitivity clear up
to 700nm. That might not seem like much, but in the real world it amounts to a very significant difference in the way these two respective films respond to filters. Spectral
sensitivity can also shift with long exposures. I use TM100 for making color separation
negatives in the lab, so am acutely aware of how both this and the curve shape can
shift with long exposures and deep filtration. ACROS is noted for excellent recip
characteristics, but by comparison, would be useless as a tricolor separation film using
traditional optical workflow. Outdoors these films also handle very differently and have
a very different look. And TMY400 is different from either of them, though distinctly
panchromatic. Trying to go into the mtns or along the coast, and having to choose
between ACROS or TMY, is like being a kid in a candy store. Both are great films. I
tend to gravitate to ACROS for 4x5 and TMY for 8X10.

[Drew Wiley]

Jay - to repeat, Orthopan and panchromatic are different terms because the films are
indeed different. For example, you can only use up to a medium red filter on orthopan
without losing shadow value completely, whereas most pan films you can use a deep
red filter if necessary. The response of certain skin tones and warm earth colors in the
desert, for example, will also be quite different. TM100 can sometimes look downright
pale or pasty in such situations without a green filter of some sorts. I'm not guessing.

[Jay DeFehr]

Wait a tick! I just noticed Fuji calls Acros "Orhtopanchromatic". I'm glad I'm not crazy, but I wonder how they arrive at that designation?

[Jay DeFehr]

Jay - to repeat, Orthopan and panchromatic are different terms because the films are
indeed different. For example, you can only use up to a medium red filter on orthopan
without losing shadow value completely, whereas most pan films you can use a deep
red filter if necessary. The response of certain skin tones and warm earth colors in the
desert, for example, will also be quite different. TM100 can sometimes look downright
pale or pasty in such situations without a green filter of some sorts. I'm not guessing.

According to Fuji, Acros is "Orhtopanchromatic", but their filter corrections are identical to Kodak's for TMX even for Red No.25.

Are you sure you're not confusing Orhtopanchromatic with regular Orthochromatic?

[Brian C. Miller]

Eh, shade me as missing Techpan (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/p255/p255.pdf). Now there was a film with extended blue and red sensitivity. And fine granularity. I still have a few sheets left.

Personally, I like Neopan because I like its grain (or lack thereof) better than TMax. It looks more like Techpan.

Anyways, since the shadows are "blue"-lit, what "opens up" the shadows is the film's blue sensitivity. What accentuates the shadows is the lack of red sensitivity. TMax still shows a dive down at 625, "at 1.0 greater than Dmin". The Fuji datasheet doesn't show absolute numbers like Kodak, so I question how closely they match each other. Of course, they don't compare to the Efke/Maco IR820 datasheet (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/MACO_IR820c_AURA.pdf) for seriously leaving room for interpretation.

[Drew Wiley]

Not confused at all, Jay. For ordinary purposes, filter correction for 25 medium red will
be about the same for TM100 and ACROS. That's exactly what I implied. Deep red 29
is a completely different subject. Why this is so critical is that you're right at the end
of the film's sensitivity in the case of ACROS, and red is a popular filter. The handling of greens is completely different between these film for the same reason, because green is the direct complement of red. Ortho film (as opposed to orthopan) doesn't see red at all. Orthopan sees it, but with a very different emphasis than panchromatic.

[D. Bryant]

TMY has a built in UV filter which makes printing times for most alt processes inordinately long, or causes them to not print at all.

Jim,

I think you meant to write TMX not TMY has a built in UV filter.

Don Bryant

[Jay DeFehr]

Not confused at all, Jay. For ordinary purposes, filter correction for 25 medium red will
be about the same for TM100 and ACROS. That's exactly what I implied. Deep red 29
is a completely different subject. Why this is so critical is that you're right at the end
of the film's sensitivity in the case of ACROS, and red is a popular filter. The handling of greens is completely different between these film for the same reason, because green is the direct complement of red. Ortho film (as opposed to orthopan) doesn't see red at all. Orthopan sees it, but with a very different emphasis than panchromatic.

I'm sure you're right, Drew. When I compare my prints made with Acros and TMX, it seems the mid tones look a little different, with the Acros resembling other ortho films and the TMX resembling TP. I assumed TMX is more sensitive to red and Acros is less so. Maybe I'm imagining it all, based on assumptions and suppositions. I very rarely use filters, of any kind, so my assumptions have never really been put to the test. Both films are amazing, in my opinion.