Oh no! Yet another b&w film...

[Ian Grant]

More details about how T-Max 100 was failing the ASA method testing (presumably on introduction)?

There were articles in Darkroom Technique by John Sexton who as a consultant tested Tmax 100 extensively before its release, one of them references the ISO speed issue and then Kodak had the ASA change the testing system to a more practical approach. There's details in a thread here somewhere.

Ian

 

[Donald Qualls]

Kodak had the ASA change the testing system to a more practical approach. There's details in a thread here somewhere.

I might have to dig that up when I have time to read it. Still makes one wonder how a single manufacture (even Kodak!) could influence ASA more easily than they could fix their own product...

 

[MattKing]

I might have to dig that up when I have time to read it. Still makes one wonder how a single manufacture (even Kodak!) could influence ASA more easily than they could fix their own product...

Well, if "fixing" their product made the product worse, and the testing less reflective of real world use...
The ISO testing was modified in a way that it more accurately reflected the needs and preferences of commercial labs and their customers. It is rooted, at least in part, on users' reactions to real world prints (and presumably slides).
The need for the change was probably as much related to Kodak's relationship with the commercial photofinishing business as it was with the film manufacturing business.

 

[Lachlan Young]

There's really only a limited range of possibilites for what the emulsion is - and note that 640 is potentially a legitimate ISO speed for a nominal 400 speed film in a PQ developer (Microphen etc). The way the exposure range is written suggests a Foma connection. Doubt it's a new batch of T800 however.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There's really only a limited range of possibilites for what the emulsion is - and note that 640 is potentially a legitimate ISO speed for a nominal 400 speed film in a PQ developer (Microphen etc). The way the exposure range is written suggests a Foma connection. Doubt it's a new batch of T800 however.

I must have missed Foma offering an 800 speed film -- and even I don't think you could get Fomapan 400 to show 640 with just a change of chemistry.

 

[Paul Howell]

The few times I shot T800, it was pretty spot on at 800. At one time Photo Wearhouse sold a T400 film, been off their web site for few years, it could be shot a 640. Never knew who made it, PW never released a country or origin.

 

[Ian Grant]

I might have to dig that up when I have time to read it. Still makes one wonder how a single manufacture (even Kodak!) could influence ASA more easily than they could fix their own product...

Well the ASA is a US standard and with no US based competitor left Kodak could ask for the testing method to be altered.

Ron Mowrey (PE) told us that Kodak's in house test developer was Ascorbic acid based (before Xtol). Xtol wasn't released until after a Swedish company's US Patent for Ascorbic acid developers expired.

One issue was the developer specified for ASA test gives slightly higher film speed than ID-11/D76, but neither developer was a good match with Tmax 100 and shadow details were poor at 100 EI, to overcome this Kodak released Tmax developer and later Xtol.

I shot a lot of Tmax 100 35mm to 5x4 but always at 50EI, I also shot AP/APX100 which I preferred at it 100 ISO box speed, they'd get processed in Rodinal or Xtol in the same tanks (so same time) and both printed at the same grade. For LF it didn't matter but for hand held 35mm work APX100 was that stop faster, just as sharp and fine grained.

Ian

 

[Huss]

.. There are films around with higher native speeds, though -- Delta 3200 has a real speed above 1000, and so does T-Max P3200 (their marketing names give a pushed speed, but the manufacturer data sheets make it pretty clear that's a pushed speed).

Yup, I shoot Delta 3200 @ 1000 and develop normally. Comes out beautifully with very little grain. It is a 800-1000 ISO film to me.

 

[Bormental]

@Huss, when you say "normally" do you mean EI3200 times?

 

[Lachlan Young]

I must have missed Foma offering an 800 speed film -- and even I don't think you could get Fomapan 400 to show 640 with just a change of chemistry.

It went out of production in 2001 - was also sold as Paterson Acupan. It could well be any number of other emulsions - though probably not old stock of Fuji Neopan 1600.

 

[Wallendo]

It could just be more Aviphot 200, just with longer recommended development times.

These films seem a little too gimmicky to be a new film.

 

[Ian Grant]

There's really only a limited range of possibilites for what the emulsion is - and note that 640 is potentially a legitimate ISO speed for a nominal 400 speed film in a PQ developer (Microphen etc). The way the exposure range is written suggests a Foma connection. Doubt it's a new batch of T800 however.

EFKE used to give a variety of EI's with their films when I first used them.

This is from the first rolls of Kb14 I used in the mid 1970's.

Ironically I shot Pl25 (old Pl14 Din name) at 50 EI alongside Tmax100 at 50 EI, and APX100 at box speed. and years later still use Pl25 alongside Delta 100

Ian

 

[AgX]

So on the 100 anniversary of the Rollei TLR they've released a rebranded film. How about a new TLR with film and digital backs, matrix metering, 2.8 taking and view lene?

To be fair that urge should be aimed at DW Photo, the manufacturer of Rollei branded TLR's, and not at Maco.

 

[Paul Howell]

My bad, I forgot all about DW.

 

[Ernst-Jan]

To be fair that urge should be aimed at DW Photo, the manufacturer of Rollei branded TLR's, and not at Maco.

DW only makes the Hy6.
Before bankruptcy in 2015 it was called DHW Fotowerke and they made TLR's. Their website is still online.
http://www.dhw-fototechnik.de/de/rolleiflex-tlr.html

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

There's really only a limited range of possibilites for what the emulsion is - and note that 640 is potentially a legitimate ISO speed for a nominal 400 speed film in a PQ developer (Microphen etc). The way the exposure range is written suggests a Foma connection. Doubt it's a new batch of T800 however.

Astrum lists several aerial films some of which are supposed to have sensitivity not less than 400. Astrum also says it can make the film available in any format customer wants. And Astrum itself is selling the aerial films in 35mm format. So this new Rollei film could be one such film:
http://www.astrum-ltd.com/en/aerofotoplenka.html

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Astrum lists several aerial films some of which are supposed to have sensitivity not less than 400. Astrum also says it can make the film available in any format customer wants. And Astrum itself is selling the aerial films in 35mm format. So this new Rollei film could be one such film:
http://www.astrum-ltd.com/en/aerofotoplenka.html

A good candidate for reversal?

 

[Lachlan Young]

Astrum lists several aerial films some of which are supposed to have sensitivity not less than 400. Astrum also says it can make the film available in any format customer wants. And Astrum itself is selling the aerial films in 35mm format. So this new Rollei film could be one such film:
http://www.astrum-ltd.com/en/aerofotoplenka.html

The Rollei film is on triacetate, which rules out either repurposed Agfa Mortsel film or any Russian made aerial film etc. It could relate to an Orwo/ Filmotec emulsion like N75.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

But no film in 120 rolls!

This is somewhat absurd because Paul and Reinhold where the inventors of the Medium Format 120 roll film using Rolleiflex!

 

[AgX]

Astrum lists several aerial films some of which are supposed to have sensitivity not less than 400. Astrum also says it can make the film available in any format customer wants. And Astrum itself is selling the aerial films in 35mm format. So this new Rollei film could be one such film:
http://www.astrum-ltd.com/en/aerofotoplenka.html

All current aerial films are on PET base, the film in question is on TAC base.

 

[Huss]

@Huss, when you say "normally" do you mean EI3200 times?

Good question. My last roll I overexposed by 2 stops (shot it rated at 800-1000) and told the shop to develop at box speed - so they pushed it (I assume).
The result:


This was 120 film using a Brooks Plaubel Veriwide 100, which I printed at 20x30 (so the final result was cropped on the long end a little). It looked grain free.

That was before I developed film myself again, and I have some 3200 coming. So I will go for that strategy again and see how it comes out.

 

[Bormental]

Fantastic result, thanks.

 

[Paul Howell]

Astrum lists several aerial films some of which are supposed to have sensitivity not less than 400. Astrum also says it can make the film available in any format customer wants. And Astrum itself is selling the aerial films in 35mm format. So this new Rollei film could be one such film:
http://www.astrum-ltd.com/en/aerofotoplenka.html

From Astrum web site, have no idea what they are talking about. Are they selling Kodak aerial film?

Astrum LLC as a certified partner of the photographic films' producing leader "KODAK LLC" offers the aerial films in a wide range of choice. The properties of these films let to convey even small details and satisfy all the customer's demands. Our company realizes colored, black-and-white, duplicating and aerial films. Which type of them to use depends on the use condition and required results.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

From Astrum web site, have no idea what they are talking about. Are they selling Kodak aerial film?

I've no idea either. Let me ask Dmitry if he can share the datasheet for Astrum's aerial films.

 

[AgX]

From Astrum web site, have no idea what they are talking about. Are they selling Kodak aerial film?

The films listed at their aerial film page (linked to above) are all Tasma films. Or rather were, as Tasma too (as Agfa and Kodak) crimped in their offer.
But at least in the past Astrum offered Kodak aerial films in bulk too. Also their colour negative film in their consumer range is Kodak aerial film.