- Joined
- Dec 29, 2009
- Messages
- 1,235
- Format
- Multi Format
Sirius gets dibs on the first $30 roll of E100!
The price of Kodak film goes up, I still buy Kodak film. The price of Ilford film goes up, I still buy Ilford film. The price of Fuji film goes up, I still buy Fuji film.
I personally would rather die.
at lest from here, that's true.I'll stick to it. On the subject os lack of sharpness, I'm still disappointed with TMX.Those of us who've been turned off by its grain and lack of sharpness since, oh, the 1960s, agree with that sentiment. Yes, I quoted you out of context and perverted your meaning, but couldn't resist. Sorry.
Of all the films Eastman Kodak manufactures today, TRI-X sells best and will be last to go, despite price increases.
TMX definitely lacks acutance. Some exploit that by using TMX for portraiture. Others, seeking to overcome it, shoot at EI64 and develop in FX-39 II:...On the subject os lack of sharpness, I'm still disappointed with TMX.
not really sure what the problem is with "the alternative" .. plenty of inspiring photographs are made using that medium.
I agree. But what I was responding to was the apparent shock that someone was still going to buy film (Ilford, Kodak, Fuji, etc.) regardless of the price increase. With the limited film manufacturers, and being that film is one of the products one simply can't make at home, I was dismayed by said shock as the only other alternative is to go fully digital..
TMX definitely lacks acutance. Some exploit that by using TMX for portraiture. Others, seeking to overcome it, shoot at EI64 and develop in FX-39 II:
My road to sharp results has been using TMY-2 and developing in PMK.
TMX definitely lacks acutance. Some exploit that by using TMX for portraiture. Others, seeking to overcome it, shoot at EI64 and develop in FX-39 II:
My road to sharp results has been using TMY-2 and developing in PMK.
Or simply go digital....one will have to learn how to make photographic emulsions or buy some speed plates which are currently being manufactured...
Apologies for addressing something substantive in this thread...freezer to shield their hoard film and paper ( from imaginary cosmic rays )...
TMX has high resolution, but "sharpness" is how an image appears to the human eye, not resolution. It matters not how high the MTF capabilities of one's imaging chain are. TMX doesn't look "sharp" in almost all developers. I've even tried it in 8x10 and contact printed the resulting negatives. No cigar. Those prints simply don't look "sharp" to the naked eye.TMX is plenty sharp, it's just that it's got a combination of low granularity and very high resolution on top of MTF performance that holds at 100%+ out to 50 cyc/mm (essentially unmatched by anything else) - which adds up to it being quite a ruthless transmitter of MTF shortcomings in your imaging chain...
It's easy to lose sight (pun intended) of the fact that we do all this to make pictures that are looked at. The granularity of TMY-2 in PMK is exceptionally low. It's not TMX low, but, unlike 400TX, more than low enough, even up to 4X magnification. Most of my work is 4x5 with prints not bigger than 8x10, so grain doesn't enter into it. In 35mm, I use Sigma Art taking lenses and a 50mm Apo Rodagon N for printing. Performance drop-off of that combination at higher frequencies with 4x6 or 5x7 prints pales in comparison to film characteristics....TMY-II (and Delta 100 in my experience) has a more exaggerated contrast response at low frequencies - which helps most imaging systems look 'sharper' but the higher granularity and faster MTF fall-off from 100% response seems to even-out lens/ imaging system performance drop-off at higher frequencies in a less visibly obvious way (essentially through it falling away into noise/ granularity - albeit nicely crisp granularity).
I've tried TMX in many developers. XTOL didn't help acutance much, but Rodinal did. Unfortunately, the characteristic curves that result don't make for reasonable printing, requiring heroic efforts in the darkroom. Poke around the film-developer comparisons in that link I provided and look at those curves. TMY-2's acutance starts out much better than TMX's, and I've finally settled on PMK to bring it up even higher. PMK has the added benefit of taming TMY-2's curve, which otherwise rises above Zone VI or so. Printed on VC paper, TMY-2/PMK negatives are very easy to work with, especially when scenes of high brightness range like we typically encounter here in the U.S. southwest are involved.Tmax 100 and 400 can lack Acutance but I found thatt was dependant on choice of Developer. I used to shoot a lot of TMax 100 when en I couldn't get Agfa APX100 but found I got excellent acutance in Rodinal or Xtol (replenished)...
It would kill my interest in it. I like working in the dark.Would that kill you?
Saw this news by Kosmofoto (Stephen Dowling) posted on Twitter. Does anyone know about it? There is no source.
https://kosmofoto.com/2021/10/kodak-alaris-announces-significant-price-increases-for-january-2022/
Sirius gets dibs on the first $30 roll of E100!
I missed them; what did they say? Ha ha ha.I've deleted a bunch of political posts. Try to resist the temptation!
I'll take a brick.
That is absolutely unfair!My gas costs almost $5/gallon and I do not see anyone complaining about that on this website.
Sorry to hear you wouldn't be interested in photography without film. What would you do then? Photography is not about film, it is about the images.It would kill my interest in it. I like working in the dark.
I don't know if you know this, but when you are working with your digital images in PS and LR you can turn off the lights. I do. It is extra dark because I don't have to turn on the safelights. You can even put a bowl of fixer next to your monitor so you get the real darkroom smell.It would kill my interest in it. I like working in the dark.
My gas costs almost $5/gallon and I do not see anyone complaining about that on this website.
Sorry to hear you wouldn't be interested in photography without film. What would you do then? Photography is not about film, it is about the images.
I think it is about photography, not just images, not just processes, not just photographers, not just consumers of photography, but all of the above.Sorry to hear you wouldn't be interested in photography without film. What would you do then? Photography is not about film, it is about the images.
But if working in the dark with film is your main or only interest, you're a lab technician, not a photographer.I think it is about photography, not just images, not just processes, not just photographers, not just consumers of photography, but all of the above.
And generally in different proportions, for different participants.
So I would never say that someone is wrong if their interest centres around a different part of photography than mine does.
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?