I just tried to google the date of transition from old tmax to TMY-II and I do not trust the results I am seeing. I have a chance to get some 2008 confirmed frozen Tmax 400 in 4x5 for a really attractive price compared to current retail.
I just tried to google the date of transition from old tmax to TMY-II and I do not trust the results I am seeing. I have a chance to get some 2008 confirmed frozen Tmax 400 in 4x5 for a really attractive price compared to current retail.
I just tried to google the date of transition from old tmax to TMY-II and I do not trust the results I am seeing. I have a chance to get some 2008 confirmed frozen Tmax 400 in 4x5 for a really attractive price compared to current retail.
Here is the tech doc which also shows the packaging revision related to the reformulation.
That's exactly what I was thinking - great reference document that I couldn't put my hand on.
DK50 was called the poor man's HC-110, and in fact preceded HC-110 in certain graphics applications. I doubt you'll get the same effect without added salt. But might as well try just as long as they're not valuable shots.
Pan-F has such a miserably exaggerated S-curve, with such a brief straight line, that I only got a modicum of cooperation from it using a modified version of PMK pyro. It's really suited more for lower contrast scenes having a dynamic range equivalent to what's best for color transparencies too. But I have gotten lovely Pan F shots in misty conditions, and coastal fog, and mountain falling snow. TMax is just so so so much more versatile.... Speaking of fog, it's starting to lift, along with its chill, so I need to think about heading outdoors soon.
Slow films have inherently lower latitude.I have found DK-50 to give very low fog but tending toward more grain for a given film than, say, HC-110 or D-76. For MF and larger, it was never much of an issue, though.
I remember using DK-50 with some old Ultrafine Extreme 100 film in 120 and it worked very nicely. I figure that with 120 Tmax and its fine grain DK-50 might just be the cat meow.I have found DK-50 to give very low fog but tending toward more grain for a given film than, say, HC-110 or D-76. For MF and larger, it was never much of an issue, though.
I remember using DK-50 with some old Ultrafine Extreme 100 film in 120 and it worked very nicely. I figure that with 120 Tmax and its fine grain DK-50 might just be the cat meow.
Grain helps with the mostly subjective phenomena of apparent sharpness because it contributes some edges.
Acutance - observable edge contrast - is a major component of what we perceive as sharpness.
Resolution contributes to perceived sharpness, but they are not the same.
This is too technical for my feeble mind.
I just go back to 1940's Kodak "brilliant negatives" "fine grain" "snappy" or good old Ilford Hypersensitive Panchromatic. That's proper film speak.
Especially if you find you need the faster shutter speeds available from 400 vs 100 ISO films.It wouldn't be the worst option in the world to use TMY for everything either.
Especially if you find you need the faster shutter speeds available from 400 vs 100 ISO films.
Doremus
Think of it this way: a little grain gives some "bite" to the image!
Lesson learned - I'll confirm alignment before any meaningful printing session.
regarding the chromogenic B&W films but my two cents is they are way underrated
Perceptol 1+3 is unlikely to promote a meaningful increase in edge effects. Presumably the idea behind this is (loosely) based on dilute metol-only / low sulfite developers enhancing edge effects, but it's not quite as simple as diluting Perceptol 1+3. It would really need to be further diluted, not to mention alkalinity is an important factor (and based on the research I've seen, the pH of Perceptol is less than ideal for enhancing edge effects with metol although to be fair that research pre-dated tabular and/or core/shell iodide etc.). The attributes of a developer that generally promote edge effects also tend to increase granularity.
Slow films have inherently lower latitude.
I thought chromogenic XP2 was the least versatile,
I also wonder how long those dyes will hold up.
Lachlan could comment in more detail regarding the chromogenic B&W films but my two cents is they are way underrated (for lack of a better word).
I found XP2 pretty good but I only used it with C41 process. Now i've seen online the results one can get in regular B/W chemistry and... WOW! such fine grain and image quality!
It doesn't! We're not talking about "full strength" Perceptol here, but diluted 1+3 or even 1+4. It's not so much the Sodium Chloride doing the grain softening in Perceptol, but the high Sodium Sulfite content that softens the grain more. When you dilute the stock developer it also dilutes the high Sodium Sulfite content, which in turn enhances the sharpness/edge effects.
So if Sodium Chloride does nothing then presumably D23 which is Perceptol minus the salt will produce the same effect at 1+3 or 4?
pentaxuser
So if Sodium Chloride does nothing then presumably D23 which is Perceptol minus the salt will produce the same effect at 1+3 or 4?
pentaxuser
Do you have an image of the packaging available?
TMY-2 was released Oct 2007
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?