Kodak TMY revised

Snapshot

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
913
Location
Toronto, Ont
Format
Multi Format
I presume bulk rolls will be available, unless there is something I missed in the press release.
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
mhv said:
I've always noticed the same thing (which is why I never use them), but then I look at John Sexton's print and they are anything but...

Although, given that it's 2007 and this is an updated B&W film, I'm tempted to try it.
Click to expand...

I'll definitely try it.

I can see why T-Max films work for John Sexton. I think he likes to start with something fairly neutral, photographed in relatively undramatic light, and he creates the drama through detailed local manipulation in the darkroom. That linear spectrum, B&W video look, contributes to that initial neutrality that then can be transformed into something else.

I think he's been shooting more Tri-X lately, though, or maybe he's just endorsing Tri-X. Maybe I'll drop in on PhotoPlus and see if I can ask him.
 

Uncle Bill

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
1,395
Location
Oakville and
Format
Multi Format
This is really interesting news, I can't wait to try some the new and improved Tmax 400 arrives on the shelves in Southern Ontario.

Bill
 

Black Dog

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2003
Messages
4,291
Location
Running up that hill
Format
Multi Format
While I'm an Ilford man, this is still great news!
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format

Well, I don't do any contact printing but Kodak's acknowledgement that there actually IS a group that does AND that they recognize the needs of that group is the most encouraging news I've heard out of Kodak in a long time.
 

Peter Schrager

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
4,158
Location
fairfield co
Format
Large Format
TMY 400

Is this the same Kodak because this marks a turnaround decision for a company we thought left us behind....I'm really impressed with this because TMY is already the LF person's dream film. Unfortunately I had recently done a show on AZO and TMY rollfilm.. now the film excludes this as I still believe in small prints. Oh well it's still wonderful news. Would like to get some time with Xtol 1 to 1
Best, Peter
 

JanaM

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
115
Format
35mm

Dear Ron,

I don't think that we actually see a reduced rate of new films coming into the market. Kodak ist still very active with 8 (!) improved films during the last 14 months. Even in the golden age of film photography it was very seldom that such a lot of films during such a short time hit the market.

And all the other manufacturers are very active, too.
During the last three years more the 20 (!) new and/or improved films were introduced:
Fuji PRO 160S and 160C, Fuji Velvia 100, Kodak Portra 800, Spur Orthopan UR/Adox CMS 20, Rollei IR 820/400, Rollei Ortho 25, Rollei Pan 25, Rollei Scanfilm CN 400 Pro, Rollei Slide Direkt, Kodak Portra 160 NC and VC, Kodak Portra 400 NC and VC, Fuji T64, Fuji Provia 400X, Kodak Farbwelt 100 and 200 (I think these films are called Kodak Gold outside Germany), Gigabitfilm GTP 32 / Rollei ATP V1, Rollei Digibase CN 200, the improved Kodak TMY in the beginning of 2008, and probably already this year the new Rollei 200 ASA BW film.

And furthermore we have seen the reintroduction of Ilford SFX 200, Efke IR 820 and Fuji Velvia 50.
A lot of stuff to test.... .

Regards,
Jana
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Jana;

I think that others have commented on the dichotomy here in that we have seen a reduced product count and the type of packaged products. We are losing 220 films in some lines, and certain LF and ULF products. Yet we see an abundance of 'new' films.

Basically, you can expect that the new senstization of both Fuji and Kodak (tellurium for Fuji and 2 electron for Kodak) to be introduced. The lower ROI is decreasing the rate and number of changes though, so a new film might once have had new couplers and new emulsions, and now it only contains 1 change to the emulsions, namely the sensitization.

The staffing is not there to support the rate and number that once was. For example, at one time the new sensitization might have appeared in motion picture, amateur, professional and B&W products at the same time, and now each line gets upgraded one at a time due to the staffing. They used to have 4 groups to do all of that, but now have only one.

PE
 

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
4,793
Location
Montréal, QC
Format
Multi Format
It is to be hoped that the increased marketing/innovation ratio will help to stabilize the market.

In a way, even if "new" films only have one major change instead of many as it used to be, what matters is that the manufacturers are still working to keep film on the radar. A few years ago, this would have been more hype than necessary, but perhaps now it is vital to insist on every single change?
 

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
I have had a question for some time about this 2 electron sensitization. I didn't bother asking it before because I thought PE said while it could be applied to trad B&W film and that it had some research on it, it would probably never make it to market because of expenses.

Anyway, if this was applied to a film like TMZ, instead of keeping the same speed and reducing the grain, since TMZ is grainy and I like it like that, does this technology allow for increased speed at the same grain? Could a flim like TMZ be made to be an ISO ~2400 film with the same grain as the current ISO ~1200 film. Or would the speed increase be less?

While the idea of TMX and TMY with less grain is great, the idea of TMZ or Tri-X with less grain makes me wince.
 

John Shriver

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
482
Format
35mm RF
I wonder if TMAX 3200 sells well enough to justify the investment in 2 electron sensitization? Of course, some layers of the emulsion in Portra 800 must be that fast, so the underlying recipe is there.

Adapting 2 electron sensitization to non-T-grain films may be a large investment that Kodak chooses not to make. Very different crystal growth process. So maybe it won't ever get to Tri-X.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
In an 800 speed film with 3 components, the slow is 400, the mid is 800 and the fast is 1600. This is an approximation.

For a 400 speed film with 3 components the slow is 200, the mid is 400 and the fast is 800.

This is a normal guesstimate for engineers working on the films.

A TRUE 3200 speed film would then have a 6400 speed film as the fast component.

Two electron sensitization will theoretically work with any type of grain. It uses a Pentacyano osmate complex with a sensitizing dye. The problem has been one of optimization with each emulsion component for keeping, latent image and reciprocity so everything moves the same way.

PE
 

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm

Hi PE - O.K. I'll admit to my complete ignorance. Can you explain why a film with a given ISO rating would be made from 3 components with different speeds like this?
Thanks,

Dan
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Dan;

Negative films (color and B&W) are made to a contrast value of 0.6 on average. This is to get the long latitude that we expect of our negative films.

Emulsions do not naturally have that much latitude, and therefore 3 of them are blended in normal films, to give a very long latitude film that allows huge over and under exposure, lots of detail in shadows, and lots of detail in highlights.

If one emulsion were used, then the latitude would be essentially zero.

PE
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Tim;

Kodak had done all of the research, but I thought that they wouldn't invest in bringing an improved B&W film to market. Their studies apparently showed otherwise and I was wrong. There is a market for improved B&W as far as Kodak is concerned.

I'm glad I was wrong. Aren't you????

PE
 

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm

Hmm - I see - so the fast component records shadows, the middle one mid tones and the slow one highlights?

Thanks

Dan
 

JonPorter

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
67
Location
San Francisc
Format
Medium Format
The improved TMY announcement dovetails nicely with the Associated Press story last week that stated "Kodak still is leaning hard on high-margin film to generate the profits needed to see it through the most painful passage in its 126-year history."
 

JanaM

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
115
Format
35mm

Now the interesting question is, how the competition will react. Fuji has the technology to make a very fine grained 400 ASA BW Film. This Fuji Neopan Acros 400 would be a nice supplementation to their film programme.
And perhaps it is possible for Ilford to further improve their Delta 400.

Photo Engineer said:
I'm glad I was wrong. Aren't you????

PE
Click to expand...

I am very glad, that you were wrong . You are an excellent engineer. But as a market researcher, you are not so good... .

Nice weekend,
Jana
 

Michael W

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
1,594
Location
Sydney
Format
Multi Format
The B&W film I would most like to see is Fuji Neopan 1600 in medium format.
Please Fuji, please.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
dslater said:
Hmm - I see - so the fast component records shadows, the middle one mid tones and the slow one highlights?

Thanks

Dan
Click to expand...

The middle one is long enough to do most everything, but the combination of all 3 gives extended latitude into shadows and highlights, so you are essentially correct.

This is why you can over and under expose negative films, and why they are superior to reversal films, both B&W and color.

PE
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
JanaM said:
I am very glad, that you were wrong . You are an excellent engineer. But as a market researcher, you are not so good... .

Jana
Click to expand...

Jana;

I must admit that I didn't ask anyone and based my comments on information from about 2 years ago when they quit the paper market. However, if you remember the recent survey commented on here on APUG, which was conducted by Kodak. Well, this apparently changed their minds, or opened their eyes and the new film was released.

I think 2 years ago, many at EK would have agreed with me. I kept my opinion, and Kodak fortunately changed theirs after a market survey and sales information which I did not have. I'm glad they changed.

Of course, I knew of the enthusiasm here on APUG, but didn't know what kind of impact that would have on EK.

PE
 

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
Photo Engineer said:
I'm glad I was wrong. Aren't you????
Click to expand...

Absolutely! I actually wanted to tell people I interact with everyday, but I figured they would think I was crazy getting all excited over a new version of a film I don't even use

I guess my question was if this 2 e- business always makes emulsions finer grained - or if you can make the film faster? But I guess you're saying that (for example) TMY is a 200, a 400, and an 800 emulsion mixed together. Add in 2 e- and (with lots of hard work) you have a finer grain 200, 400, and 800 mix still. To make TMY an 800 film would require a 400, 800, and 1600 mix, which would require a lot more development on top of all the work that is done incorporating the 2 e- stuff.

So even if TMZ gets upgraded, there is essentially no chance it would leverage 2 e- sensitization into a faster film as opposed to finer grained, since that would essentially require making a whole new film (not that adding the 2 e- sensitization isn't a whole 'new' film).

What are the limits to speed in making film? Would a true ISO 3200 film look like sandpaper? Or is it not even feasible?
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
2e sensitization, applied directly to a 400 film (all else being equal and it even worked) would theoretically turn it into an 800 speed film. The alternative is to apply it to a 200 speed film and make a 400 speed film. This is all a drastic simplification of course, but you get the idea.

Film speed is limited by 'heat death'. The faster you make a film, the more sensitive it is to heat. At about 24,000 speed (IIRC), film is just barely stable to be put on the shelves for a few months, therefore the most practical films would be slower to have reasonable shelf life and storage.

Sensitivity to X-rays and cosmic rays also goes up with speed.

PE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…