New TMY Sheet Film Samples

[Michael Kadillak]

Kodak has just sent out samples of their new T Max 400 (TMY) sheet film in 4x5 size indicating that they are in full swing production. The box has 50 sheets and while it has the same catelog number (843 8202) the emulsion code is 102 and the packaging has bright red packaging in several languages clearly distinguishing it from the former offering. Plus, the notch is a single "V" as opposed to the more elaborate notch code on the previous emulsion.

I expect that this marvelous new film will be at your favorite re-seller shortly.

Cheers!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

That's fantastic news. I wonder if this film, with the absence of UV filtration, can be developed by inspection... I'm very curious.
- Thomas

 

[RoBBo]

Plus, the notch is a single "V" as opposed to the more elaborate notch code on the previous emulsion.

I expect that this marvelous new film will be at your favorite re-seller shortly.

Cheers!

Man that kind of bugs me, I keep having issues with notch codes.
Velvia 50 and Efke 25 both have the exact same notches, and are both very common films for me to be using.
Not sure about the new V50 actually, since I'm still going through an old box, but for me at least, it's kind of a bitch.

And now this, Forte 200 uses the single V for a notch code, though I guess it's 'out' now, but I still have a bit of it in use.
I suppose it's not so bad since I wont be using the new TMY, and if I ever do, I'll be out of Forte by then...
Anyone else know of any other mixing notches like that?

 

[Alden]

Why sweat code notches? They're only there to find the emulsion side.
You don't throw every film you use into one box then sort it later do you?

 

[JLP]

Thomas, As far as i know the new TMY will not be any different than the old. Only the TMX100 have the UV blocking layer.

jan

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Ah, thanks Jan. I guess that means no... I'm happy there's FP4 and Tri-X for me.
- Thomas

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Actually, that's what I do, Alden But I don't sweat it anyway. I develop the film by inspection and just trust that I got the exposure right, so it doesn't really matter anyway, except with TMY you can't see the highlights develop through the base side due to some coating or another... Shame, because it's really nice film.

Why sweat code notches? They're only there to find the emulsion side.
You don't throw every film you use into one box then sort it later do you?

 

[c6h6o3]

That's fantastic news. I wonder if this film, with the absence of UV filtration, can be developed by inspection... I'm very curious.
- Thomas

Until we shoot it, develop it and print it we won't know whether or not Kodak kept out the UV filtration. I know I told them that among the photographers I knew this was our major concern. I'm sure Mike Kadillak hammered that point as well, so I'm hopeful. But with these guys you never really know. I'm told that the samples we got of the rollfilm did not include it but that the production rolls do include it.

In any case, the UV filtration has nothing to do with the ability to develop by inspection. The old TMY doesn't have it and I can't develop that by inspection. It's the magenta sensitization dye that's the culprit with green safelights, not any UV filtering.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't sure what caused the inspection to fail. Goes to prove how unaware I am of the scientific parts of photography.
- Thomas

 

[Sanjay Sen]

Why sweat code notches? They're only there to find the emulsion side.
You don't throw every film you use into one box then sort it later do you?

Well, for certain folks (like me for instance) it could be a problem. I still have some Forte 200 left, and would like to try the new TMY. Sometimes I forget to label the holders properly and need to check what is loaded in them. If both films have the same notch code, that will be a problem...


Michael, thanks for the update!


Best wishes,
Sanjay

 

[John Kasaian]

Exciting news! I can't wait to try to try it out in the GVII

 

[Peter Schrager]

UV blocker

I would be very surprised if the new film had a UV blocker...all the films are cut from master rolls -remember?? so much speculation...kodak aint dead and they aint totally stupid...
Best, Peter

 

[Mahler_one]

New Film

For those of us who have calibrated exposure and development based upon film curves and densitometer work the new film will eventually mean repeating our film tests again for both sheet and roll film. One can only hope the effort will be worth it....Obviously Ilford can become one's choice if one wishes NOT to have to recalibrate everything. Nothing "wrong" with Delta and HP5, but if one wants to use ready loads in the field it's either Fuji or Kodak. We'll be waiting for reviews from our talented and sharing members.

Edwin

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sheet film and roll film are coated on different stock entirely. One is 7 mil and the other is 5 mil. So it is possible to stock all 4 varieties involved. A +UV and -UV in 5 and 7 mil. Actually they all start with 2 supports and then the backing is coated on. The UV could be in the backing as additional AH, and it could be in an overcoat as well.

I've seen all of this done.

PE

 

[jgjbowen]

Edwin,

I fail to grasp our point. If I continue with TMY, I'll have to recalibrate, but if I switch to any other product, I'll also have to calibrate that product. How can I switch to Ilford products and NOT determine my personal film speed and development time?????

John

 

[PhotoJim]

For those of us who have calibrated exposure and development based upon film curves and densitometer work the new film will eventually mean repeating our film tests again for both sheet and roll film. One can only hope the effort will be worth it....Obviously Ilford can become one's choice if one wishes NOT to have to recalibrate everything. Nothing "wrong" with Delta and HP5, but if one wants to use ready loads in the field it's either Fuji or Kodak. We'll be waiting for reviews from our talented and sharing members.

In fairness to Kodak, Ilford has reformulated films. Pan-F, FP-4 and HP-5 were reformulated in the early 1990s to the current Plus films, and 400 Delta became Delta 400 with a new emulsion about seven or eight years ago. The new fiscal reality of Ilford/Harman might mean little to no reformulation of existing films; I don't know.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak has an active develpment program for B&W films going ahead under an old associate of mine at EK. He is/was responsible for this new film and is working on more goodies for us all.

PE

 

[Alex Hawley]

For those of us who have calibrated exposure and development based upon film curves and densitometer work the new film will eventually mean repeating our film tests again for both sheet and roll film. One can only hope the effort will be worth it....Obviously Ilford can become one's choice if one wishes NOT to have to recalibrate everything. Nothing "wrong" with Delta and HP5, but if one wants to use ready loads in the field it's either Fuji or Kodak.

Some folks check each and every box of film they buy for speed, irregardless of who makes it.

 

[Alex Hawley]

I'm anxiously awaiting the arrival of the new TMY sheet film on the market.

 

[c6h6o3]

I'm anxiously awaiting the arrival of the new TMY sheet film on the market.

Me too. What little work I was able to do with the roll film yielded fabulous results. But I'm a contact printer, so I couldn't really put it through its paces properly. The sheet film will tell the tale.

 

[Vaughn]

Some folks check each and every box of film they buy for speed, irregardless of who makes it.

And some of us just make photographs. I am too busy dancing with the light to worry about exactly what sort of wood makes up the dance floor.

To each their own drummer...

Vaughn

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Batch-to-batch consistency and stability in storage are attractions of the films from the major manufacturers, but if you happen to like the look of Foma or Efke, it is worth testing, and it can be as simple as comparing the first sheet from the new batch with the last sheet from the old batch, two sides of the same holder, exposed one after the other and processed together. I was surprised once when I found two batches of Fortepan 400 about a half stop apart (probably due to storage conditions, since they were from two different distributors), but then it occurred to me that if I was going to use a film made with 1950s technology, I'd also have to follow the same testing procedures that photographers concerned about consistency would use in that era as well.

Anyway, that's off topic, but the point is that testing doesn't have to be that complicated, and one can learn a few things in the process that will save time and effort later.

 

[Vaughn]

Good point, David.

Vaughn

 

[doughowk]

From Kodak's website, new technical information on their films. Looking forward to trying it in larger sheet film sizes; and, with the dollar being so low, it's cost should be very competitive to European films.

 

[Photo Engineer]

What David says above is going to become more true and the necessary testing will become more important as time goes on. Storage, shelf life and batch to batch variations of films and papers made by the older methods are becoming significant factors as people buy more economy films.

PE