Regards, Art.Some key statements from the article:
- In a nutshell, it (TMAX) seems to do all that Kodak claims, and more. It is both sharper and finer grained, as claimed, and in our tests, it delivered better tonality; was easier to print; and was less critical in both exposure and development.
- Both T-grain and Delta have greatly improved since those early days, but directly comparing TMY2 with TMY revealed yet another small but significant improvement in tolerance...Only you can decide your priorities, but what astonished us was that in some cases, Roger actually preferred the tonality of the new TMY shots to Tri-Xsomething that has never happened with any previous T-Max film.
- If you have been using the earlier generation of T-Max, there seems to be absolutely no drawbacks to the new film, as compared with the older version. As we said earlier, it seems to do everything that Kodak claims, and more. This is, quite simply, a better film than the old T-Max 400.
- Do not dismiss Kodak. That last sentence is sufficiently important that it is worth repeating. Do not dismiss Kodak. They have certainly been known to send mixed messages about their commitment to film: messages that sometimes seem to suggest they have no interest whatsoever. Then they come up with something like TMY2.
Thanks for that. Pity that Roger no longer participates here.
pentaxuser
Roger told me that he was driven out because people complained to the moderators that there were too many references [mostly by others, not Roger] to his website. The moderators then leaned on him. In the end, the complainers have done the rest of us a great disservice.
Steve
Roger was perfectly welcome here but over promoted/marketed his business in the forums. This puts us in a bad position as if he's allowed then others also want to reside here for the same purpose. We have strict policies in place to curb such activity. We simply requested he tone it down a tad at which point he admitted there would be no value in participating here anymore. That was his choice and I don't feel we were unfair or ran anyone off.Roger told me that he was driven out because people complained to the moderators that there were too many references [mostly by others, not Roger] to his website. The moderators then leaned on him. In the end, the complainers have done the rest of us a great disservice.
Steve
It doesn't surprise me. I know about other people who left for the same reason - the lobby acts in a self-destroying manner. In the long term it is just Apug the biggest looser.
I love it when people reference others without giving names. It adds so much credibility to their argument! :rolleyes:
I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.
Sandy
Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to be bigger than he actually is.Besides Art's obvious copyright infringe which is a separate matter, I believe the reasons for Rogers departure have nothing to do with reference to his website made by him or anyone else.
Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to bigger than he actually is.
And for that reason I think Sean was right to set the matter straight. If you leave people free to speculate wildly no telling where the conversation will go.
From another perspective, I have also reviewed the new TMY-2 film (article in View Camera) and compared it to the old film. I did find an improvement, but frankly when I read the review by Roger and Frances I felt that we were comparing two different films. I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.
Sandy
Sandy: Did you have to change any of your devloping times with the new film, i.e., in 4x5, were the film curves similar? Am I wrong....didn't you post some of your data on APUG a few months back?
Thanks.
Ed
"If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
I would never have got out of Flin Flon."
............................................. Bobby Clarke.
.
.
.
"If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
I would never have got out of Flin Flon."
............................................. Bobby Clarke.
Also, is it just me, or does Shutterbug wait months and months and months before reviewing a new film? I got my first issue via subscription from them when they wrote their first review of the new Velvia 50; as I recall the new Velvia had been out for almost six months already.
Shutterbug has articles?!
Feature articles can be scheduled 6 months in advance, but most mag's will allow for much more timely insertions, but generally not less than a month. This is why magazines are often given preproduction or early production samples so the articles can be published in line with the launch. The reason for the long delay says more about priorities at shutterbug then it does publishing schedules. I don't read that mag, but I'd guess that the latest DSLR reviews neatly corresponded with the launch of the product and the large media buys by the manufacturer.
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?