The New Kodak Tmax 400- A User Review

ic-racer said:

There ARE many variables, but you did keep then constant from film-to-film when doing the evaluations, right? Can we see the scans?

Click to expand...

I knew someone would want to see the comparision of old and new but as it happens (and this is going to sound quite lame) I accidently pitched the folder that had the old neg (the dog ate my negative!). My testing was tight with all scans and processing done equally- in fact, going into these tests I was quite sure I was going to dislike the new TMAX as much as I do the old TMAX- so wasn't I pleasantly suprised. It sounds like Sandy King in the new View Camera has side-by-sides so I would suggest checking that as a good route. I also would suggest doing your own side-by-side (never trust anyone!) just to be sure you agree. I loved several of the Ilford films (FP4 in PMK was my favorite) but as I mentioned this new combo of TMAX 400 in Xtol fits my needs best of all.

Best-
Stephen Schaub

Figital Revolution said:

It sounds like Sandy King in the new View Camera has side-by-sides so I would suggest checking that as a good route. I also would suggest doing your own side-by-side (never trust anyone!) just to be sure you agree. I loved several of the Ilford films (FP4 in PMK was my favorite) but as I mentioned this new combo of TMAX 400 in Xtol fits my needs best of all.

Best-
Stephen Schaub

Click to expand...

In the article in View Camera I show side by side comparisons of crops of the new versus old TMY, with complete BTZS data and charts for both films.

Sandy King

sanking said:

In the article in View Camera I show side by side comparisons of crops of the new versus old TMY, with complete BTZS data and charts for both films.

Sandy King

Click to expand...

Excellent, I will have to check it out!

Wet scanning on Imacon?

Stephen, would you be willing to describe how you do wet scanning on your Imacon? I've never heard of anyone who did that, and it's not immediately clear from the mechanics of the scanner how that could be done.

Thanks.

jslabovitz said:

Stephen, would you be willing to describe how you do wet scanning on your Imacon? I've never heard of anyone who did that, and it's not immediately clear from the mechanics of the scanner how that could be done.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Yes- go to Aztek Scanner on the web (http://www.aztek.com/index.html)and order the Kami solution and Optically Clear Scanner Mounting Mylar...I also like the Photex Scanner Wipes. The negative is sandwiched between two sheets of this mylar with a bit of kami solution. The solution dries instantly once you remove the negative from this sandwich so there is no need to rewash your film (nice!) Kami is basically a dilute film cleaner with some additional propetries to help increase your scan quality. This "sandwich" of film and mylar simply goes in your standard carrier or better yet choose a holder that is slightly larger say a 6.45 for 35mm and scan full frame. It is really simple to do just takes a bit of pratice. The difference in scan qualtiy is really amazing. This technique also allows you to turn off the dust removal and the scans are way sharper due to the properties of the Kami solution and dust and scratches almost completely disappear. The Mylar sheets (which I cut down to size from the 8.5 x 11 sheets it comes as) can be used for 2 or 3 scans provided you are carefull. Here is a link to the site...there is also a video to watch on using this on flat bed scanners...this can be extrapolated (sp?) to the Imacon with a bit of creative thinking...

http://www.aztek.com/consumables.html

Give it a shot...just remember to push to the edges of the mylar all excess Kami solution and air bubbles...you will see what I mean when you try it. When you insert the mylar sandwich in the holder you want to flex the holder so the mylar bends with the holder as you lower the magnetic holder cover. Once you done it it is quite simple and quick...I use this technique on every scan we do at Indian Hill Imageworks (www.indianhillimageworks.com). Good luck!

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

PS- The Y Strap now comes in BLACK! More info on www.ystrap.com

Figital Revolution said:

I knew someone would want to see the comparision of old and new but as it happens (and this is going to sound quite lame) I accidently pitched the folder that had the old neg (the dog ate my negative!).
Best-
Stephen Schaub

Click to expand...

Stephen. On the basis that what goes in must come out, I wonder if it was coarser grained

Seriously I'd love to congratulate Kodak in terms of sales, if only it would let me buy some in the U.K. Anyone any idea when it might appear here?

FWIW I saw an article in a magazine, The British Journal of Photography I think it was called, and the picture comparisons made the new stuff look better. As pics done in a magazine tend to look poorer under magazine reproduction conditions than the genuine print in one's hand, I concluded that it was more than simply Kodak hype.

pentaxuser

sanking said:

BTW, I have an article in the current issue of View Camera magazine which compares TMY and TMY-2. I used D76 1:1 for the large format tests, but did other tests with TMY-2 in 120 format in a pyro staining developer. Sandy King

Click to expand...

Hello Sandy,
Could you confirm which issue of View Camera? I am most interested and I did not see it in the Jan/Feb issue I just purchased. Thanks!

BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed the He Chongyue article in Jan/Feb.

MP_Wayne said:

Hello Sandy,
Could you confirm which issue of View Camera? I am most interested and I did not see it in the Jan/Feb issue I just purchased. Thanks!

BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed the He Chongyue article in Jan/Feb.

Click to expand...

The article is in the March/April issue, which is now out.

And thanks for your comments about the article on He Chongyue. His large prints from 8X20 original negatives are really something.

BTW, I am working on another article at this time comparing TMY-2 to Tmax-100.

Sandy

sanking said:

The article is in the March/April issue, which is now out.

And thanks for your comments about the article on He Chongyue. His large prints from 8X20 original negatives are really something.

BTW, I am working on another article at this time comparing TMY-2 to Tmax-100.

Sandy

Click to expand...

Sandy- that would be very interesting (TMY-2 Vs Tmax 100) I have a feeling
based on other films I've compared to TMY-2 (Efke 50, Iford Fp4 and Hp5 and Fomapan Creative T200) that the new TMY-2 will fare quite well overall. I look forward to your results.

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

sanking said:

The article is in the March/April issue, which is now out. Sandy

Click to expand...

Thanks Sandy! Given that the magazine will have to travel by dogsled north of the 49th parallel to get to my igloo here in Calgary, that would explain why I have not seen it yet... ;-)
Thanks!

pentaxuser said:

Stephen. On the basis that what goes in must come out, I wonder if it was coarser grained

Seriously I'd love to congratulate Kodak in terms of sales, if only it would let me buy some in the U.K. Anyone any idea when it might appear here?

FWIW I saw an article in a magazine, The British Journal of Photography I think it was called, and the picture comparisons made the new stuff look better. As pics done in a magazine tend to look poorer under magazine reproduction conditions than the genuine print in one's hand, I concluded that it was more than simply Kodak hype.

pentaxuser

Click to expand...

Sorry to say I have no info on international delivery but as this is the new film (the old Tmax is now history) I suspect that it will be sooner rather than later. IMHO as a side by side the new is quite superior...I'm now off to the darkroom to process more of it (TMY-2)...as well as some I pushed to 1600 and 3200...I will try to post thoughts on this later.
Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.ystrap.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

MP_Wayne said:

Thanks Sandy! Given that the magazine will have to travel by dogsled north of the 49th parallel to get to my igloo here in Calgary, that would explain why I have not seen it yet... ;-)
Thanks!

Click to expand...

Are you a subscriber? If so, the article is available in the View Camera subscribers section available form the web site.

Sandy

sanking said:

The article is in the March/April issue, which is now out.

Click to expand...

Just went to "Borders" today and couldn't find it, not even hidden behind "Enter the Digital Black Hole With A Handful of Cash And Your New Megapixel...."

I hope this is because they don't have the issue yet. I should probably suscribe.:rolleyes:

I just finished processing some TMY-2 which was pushed to 1600 and the negs really look quite nice (processed in XTOL Straight, 35mm). I will post tomorrow afternoon on www.figitalrevolution.com a sample photo, detail enlargements and thoughts...much like I did on my first post about this film. Question: Should I start a new thread here on APUG about this film pushed or just post a link here on this tread to the new post on Figital Revolution...thanks for your suggestion in advance. Have a great night.

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.ystrap.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

I haven't used any of Kodak's new TMax 400 yet. I currently process the old Tmax 400 in my Jobo at 75* using Tmax RS developer mixed 1:9 for about eight minutes. I haven't read much on how this new film responds with Tmax RS developer and a Jobo processor. I guess I will need to go through the testing phase if I decide to keep using the 400 speed film in my medium format camera. Any suggestions or references?

Very interesting.

Now, of course the big question is 'how does it compare to Tri-X?'


In all likely hood Tmax probably has a the finer grain, but how about tonality and how nicely it deals with highlights in comparison.

cheers

Harry Lime said:

Very interesting.

Now, of course the big question is 'how does it compare to Tri-X?'


In all likely hood Tmax probably has a the finer grain, but how about tonality and how nicely it deals with highlights in comparison.

cheers

Click to expand...

With regards to Grain TMAX (even the old Tmax 400) has finer grain than Trix. I used Trix as my film of choice for almost 15 years but this new TMY-2 has the best 400 grain I've seen, brilliant highlights and nice shadow seperation (processed in XTOL Straight) - (note: by best grain I am saying finest grain and not implying that the look of TMY grain is better its just finer). TMY-2 is not as forgiving for a bad exposure as Trix is (almost no film is) but when it is exposed correctly (which is not hard to do) it really sings. Many people just like the look of one over the other so I say just give it a try. I just processed a roll pushed to 1600 and will be posting an article on www.figitalrevolution.com later today...stay tuned.

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

DODDATO said:

I haven't used any of Kodak's new TMax 400 yet. I currently process the old Tmax 400 in my Jobo at 75* using Tmax RS developer mixed 1:9 for about eight minutes. I haven't read much on how this new film responds with Tmax RS developer and a Jobo processor. I guess I will need to go through the testing phase if I decide to keep using the 400 speed film in my medium format camera. Any suggestions or references?

Click to expand...

With regards to a starting time and using RS developer with the new TMY-2 Kodak suggests: Tmax RS 1:4 @ 5.75minutes at 68F...Xtol Straight at 68F for 6.5 minutes (these at rotary tube times). I've found the new pub published with TMY-2 to be a really good starting point so check it out for additional info. Suggestion: Try XTOL Straight as this film really responds well to it IMHO.

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

Figital Revolution said:

With regards to Grain TMAX (even the old Tmax 400) has finer grain than Trix. I used Trix as my film of choice for almost 15 years but this new TMY-2 has the best 400 grain I've seen, brilliant highlights and nice shadow seperation (processed in XTOL Straight) - (note: by best grain I am saying finest grain and not implying that the look of TMY grain is better its just finer). TMY-2 is not as forgiving for a bad exposure as Trix is (almost no film is) but when it is exposed correctly (which is not hard to do) it really sings. Many people just like the look of one over the other so I say just give it a try. I just processed a roll pushed to 1600 and will be posting an article on www.figitalrevolution.com later today...stay tuned.

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

Click to expand...

All this testing, geez....these guys in Vermont have far too much free time on their hands due to being snowed in all the time, and far too much access to caffeine.

BK

Early Riser said:

All this testing, geez....these guys in Vermont have far too much free time on their hands due to being snowed in all the time, and far too much access to caffeine.

BK

Click to expand...

Too much snow and never enough espresso....speaking of espresso I'm drinking one now!!!

Cheers!

New TMY

I don't agree that the old TMY has finer grain than the current version of Tri-X. In most of the developers I have used the current version of Tri-X has finer grain than that of the old TMY. This may be why Kodak worked on TMY. In a few weeks I will finally have a chance to test the new TMY which I have in 120 size. I don't know exactly what I'll find but I don't expect to see a dramatic difference in an 8X8" or 8X10" print from a 120 negative.

dynachrome said:

I don't agree that the old TMY has finer grain than the current version of Tri-X. In most of the developers I have used the current version of Tri-X has finer grain than that of the old TMY. This may be why Kodak worked on TMY. In a few weeks I will finally have a chance to test the new TMY which I have in 120 size. I don't know exactly what I'll find but I don't expect to see a dramatic difference in an 8X8" or 8X10" print from a 120 negative.

Click to expand...

As long as you are happy with your prints- to each his own!
Best-
Stephen
www.ystrap.com
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com

dynachrome said:

I don't agree that the old TMY has finer grain than the current version of Tri-X. In most of the developers I have used the current version of Tri-X has finer grain than that of the old TMY. This may be why Kodak worked on TMY. In a few weeks I will finally have a chance to test the new TMY which I have in 120 size. I don't know exactly what I'll find but I don't expect to see a dramatic difference in an 8X8" or 8X10" print from a 120 negative.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on this. Kodak made a change to emulsion of TRI-X-320 several years ago that resulted in a considerble improvement in grain over the former version of this film, which was quite grainy. The new Tri-X 320 did indeed have finer grain IMO than the old TMY.

Putting grain aside, TMY and Trix-X 320 are very different films, especially in temrs of curve shape. Tri-X320 has a very long toe and relatively short straight line whereas TMY has very long and linear straight line. This gives Tri-320 more latitude in exposure, but shadow values with TMY have more contrast, if you expose the two film for the same EFS. I usually expose TMY at box speed but rate Tri-X for only half of box speed.

Sandy King

sanking said:

I agree with you on this. Kodak made a change to emulsion of TRI-X-320 several years ago that resulted in a considerble improvement in grain over the former version of this film, which was quite grainy. The new Tri-X 320 did indeed have finer grain IMO than the old TMY.

Putting grain aside, TMY and Trix-X 320 are very different films, especially in temrs of curve shape. Tri-X320 has a very long toe and relatively short straight line whereas TMY has very long and linear straight line. This gives Tri-320 more latitude in exposure, but shadow values with TMY have more contrast, if you expose the two film for the same EFS. I usually expose TMY at box speed but rate Tri-X for only half of box speed.

Sandy King

Click to expand...

I may have mis read the first post- Tri-X 320 (120mm) YES has finner grain than the OLD TMY. I also rate the new TMY-2 at box speed and Tri-X (320) at an ei of 200.

Stephen Schaub

I have posted a new thread for my second test of this film...pushed to 1600. The link to the thread his here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

The link to the article on www.figitalrevolution.com his here:
New Kodak TMY-2 (TMAX 400) Pushed to 1600 - Processed in XTOL

Best-
Stephen Schaub
www.figitalrevolution.com
www.ystrap.com
www.indianhillimageworks.com