Delta100 and TMY-2

[Shawn Dougherty]

Match Made in Heaven?

Now that I've tried a number of different films and reviewed my favorite/best work I've found I like those prints that were exposed on t-grain films the best. If you like the modern grain films as I do, shoot in 4x5 or bigger, and print or plan to print in a UV sensitive process... then I suppose you're also splitting your film buying between Ilford and Kodak?

ISO 100
I print silver chloride and might just dabble in other Alternative Processes someday so TMX is ruled out because of it's UV blocking layer. That leaves Ilford Delta 100 for me in a low speed 4x5 and 120 film and I'm quite happy with it.

ISO 400
I shoot both 4x5 and 120 so Delta 400 is not an option since it is not sold in sheets... As I contact print only the improved grain structure of TMY2 is not that big a deal to me but none the less I'm using it because it's the only choice available to me in both formats at that speed and I'm quite happy with it as well.

I'm guessing I'm not the only one in this situation, actually, I'll bet there is a number of people using these two films together. I wonder if there is any chance of Kodak dropping the UV coating or Ilford cutting sheet film again...?

 

[Ian Grant]

I'm in your position I shoot Delta 100 and Delta 400 in roll film, both great films. But when it comes to LF I shoot Delta 100 and HP5, although I'd prefer Delta 400.

In my case Kodak's not an option it's far harer for me to buy Tmax films unless I'm back in the UK. I just wosh Ilford would re-introduce Delta 400 in sheet film sizes.

Ian

 

[mhanc]

Something old and something new... Adox CHS 100 and TMY-2. Available in all the formats I traffic in: 35mm, 120 and 8x10.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Yes, Ian, that would be nice. Being an American I try to support domestic products but in this case I'd rather give Ilford my business.

Mhanc, I've used Efke PL100 which I believe is the same film as you mention, just posted a print scan in the gallery made with that actually. Quite different than the modern films though. "It has a great tonal range, colour separation and modulates differently from modern films." ~Adox website

 

[dlin]

I've also settled on Delta 100 and TMY-2 for roll film. They are both very consistently high quality, and apart from any screw-ups on my part, give me the information I need to make my prints. I've also used TMY exclusively for sheet film, but after receiving a freezer full of Fortepan can't justify the expense of new TMY-2 until I work my way through that stash.

All the best,
Daniel

 

[John Shriver]

Ilford's feeling is that introducing Delta 400 in sheet films would just reduce volume of HP5+ sales in sheet film. So it would be a net profit loss.

Since you can't get "real" Tri-X in sheet film anymore, HP5+ offers that look. (Tri-X Professional 320 is a very different film.) So I'd say it's good for photgraphers' selection that Ilford chooses to stick with HP5+ in sheet film sizes, since it has a similar look to Tri-X.

Also, TMY-2 is a really spectacular film. I don't think anyone can compete in that niche.

 

[jgjbowen]

Shawn,

Some of my favorite subject matter is moving water....not FUZZY water, but moving water. As such, I am always looking for all the speed I can get in order to use a faster shutter speed. Thus I use TMY exclusively for all sheet film 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and 7x17. I use Tri-X for 35mm....some habits die hard and I don't currently shoot 120. The extra two stops of speed is often the difference between moving water and fuzzy water.

 

[Les]

I am most interested in te earlier comment about negative suitability for alternative processes. A list of which of the films available in sheet sizes 4x5 up to 7x17 would be useful to all. I am shooting 5x7 right now with silver-gelatin and Pt/Pd in mind for final prints, and plan to go to larger format, hopefully in the near future. Can anyone help with this?
Thanks,
Les

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Ilford's feeling is that introducing Delta 400 in sheet films would just reduce volume of HP5+ sales in sheet film. So it would be a net profit loss.

Also, TMY-2 is a really spectacular film. I don't think anyone can compete in that niche.

I think you're right on both points... Would be nice if Kodak would get rid of that darn UV layer in the TMX though.

Les, I do not have knowledge of other LF films with UV inhibitors. Might be worth doing a search or maybe starting a thread on that subject.

 

[c6h6o3]

I'm so angry at the merciless price increases for TMax that I've started looking for alternatives in 8x10. However, one look at the characteristic curve for Delta 100 stopped me dead in my tracks. It doesn't look like much of an option for either Azo or alternative process printing.

 

[jeffreyg]

I use Ilford HP5 developed in ID11 for both silver prints and platinum/palladium. I was using Delta 400 sheet 4x5 but had to switch to the HP5 when the other was discontinued. I don't notice any significant difference. Sometimes developed in pmk pyro as well.

 

[c6h6o3]

You can get a bit more density out of HP5+ than you can out of Delta 100. (A little >2.0 as opposed to a little <2.0 with Delta 100, for a relative log exposure of 4.)

With TMax, though, the characteristic curve yields a density of nearly 3.5. No comparison. I can't imagine actually printing a negative that dense, but what this gives you is confidence that under normal use you're just not going to be able to blow highlights in the negative, no matter how hard you try. What gets blown out is my film budget.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

That's a good point, Jim. I have on occasion blocked up my highlights with Delta. I have yet to overcook any TMY2, at least to the extent that I couldn't print them on grade 2 paper.

I'm shooting mostly 4x5 and 120 now so the $ isn't as bad as 8x10. I'd buy something else in that size, $5 a sheet is prohibitive for me.