cliveh
Allowing Ads
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 7,713
- Format
- 35mm RF
Well said Harry.
>Thomas Bertilsson:
> Which is which, Clive?
From a highly compressed low resolution jpeg?
The difference between the two isn't day and night, but it's there and noticeable at higher resolutions.
That said it's not a matter of one being better than the other. It's a matter of personal taste.
Which is which, Clive?
My guess also.Ok, my guess Thomas.......the two in the middle are traditional grain and the 1st and 4th are tabular grain, but I don't really know.
What defines "natural" in film manufacturing? Strange word to use.I personally dislike tabular grain technology, as laying tabular (unnatural grain shape in the first place) grain in one general direction is not natural and recording light on them even less so. Tri-X however is a real film. An organic of the film world to coin a phrase.
>Thomas Bertilsson:
> Which is which, Clive?
From a highly compressed low resolution jpeg?
The difference between the two isn't day and night, but it's there and noticeable at higher resolutions.
That said it's not a matter of one being better than the other. It's a matter of personal taste.
By the way, how does the production still go on with Kodak's current problems? I hope they are not just emptying the stores...
What defines "natural" in film manufacturing? Strange word to use.
If it's a personal choice, there clearly must be some way of telling them apart other than pixel peeping or 30x40" prints. If there is no immediate difference, then why even bother distinguishing between them?
Portraits of woman is 120 TMY-2, girl is 35mm TMY, man is 120 Delta 400 (cropped 645), and boy is 120 Tri-X 400.
The pictures are all scans of prints on Ilford MGIV fiber, and they are at max quality level, not highly compressed.
Looking at the prints, at 11x14 size I can't tell them apart based on grain.
Silver chloride grains prefer to form regular cubes, bounded by six identical crystal faces.
Portraits of woman is 120 TMY-2, girl is 35mm TMY, man is 120 Delta 400 (cropped 645), and boy is 120 Tri-X 400.
You shouldn't anthropomorphize inanimate materials. They hate that.
Someone in addition to Anchell seems to be smoking something and blowing out the smoke. One
should be able to detect the differences between these respective films in a 5x7 print. That's almost
a 5x enlargement from 35mm. I can even see the difference between TMY and TMX at that magnification. Not only the differences in grain but in curve shape (esp at the toe) are significant
and affect not only real-world metering, but also the nature of shadow separation and micro-contrast above. Magnificent tonality can be achieved with any of them, once you understand them.
But that doesn't make them interchangable. Each has its distinct suite of characteristics, which
one can then bend by dev choice, exposure strategy, etc.
If it's a personal choice, there clearly must be some way of telling them apart other than pixel peeping or 30x40" prints. If there is no immediate difference, then why even bother distinguishing between them?
Portraits of woman is 120 TMY-2, girl is 35mm TMY, man is 120 Delta 400 (cropped 645), and boy is 120 Tri-X 400.
The pictures are all scans of prints on Ilford MGIV fiber, and they are at max quality level, not highly compressed.
Looking at the prints, at 11x14 size I can't tell them apart based on grain.
You don't need to pixel peep on a 30x409 print, but you do need to be able to see the overall grain pattern. No one is going to make an accurate assessment between two black and white films stocks that are different, but not miles apart, from a low resolution jpeg that is a scan of a print that has been tinted either by digital or analogue means. Judging by the amount of posts you have to your credit you seem to be an experienced shooter, so I am surprised to hear that you don't see a difference in grain structure on an 11x14 print between TMY-2 and Tri-X, which has just about the most recognizable grain pattern in the industry. Sounds to me like you are just arguing your point in which case you are wasting my time and I'm done with this thread.
Portraits of woman is 120 TMY-2, girl is 35mm TMY, man is 120 Delta 400 (cropped 645), and boy is 120 Tri-X 400.
The pictures are all scans of prints on Ilford MGIV fiber, and they are at max quality level, not highly compressed.
Looking at the prints, at 11x14 size I can't tell them apart based on grain.
Correct. I can't tell much difference between TMY-2 and Tri-X at normal print sizes. Do you honestly think I would say that unless I meant it?
It has to do with what I process the film in, the technique that I use, and how I work with both films to match them to the paper I print on. If I was using Rodinal or HC-110 the difference would be a lot more pronounced.
I am not here to waste anybody's time. That would be cruel.
What do you develop them in? Xtol? Same developer for both?
Replenished Xtol for some, Edwal 12 for others. It depends on lighting and film. TMY-2 receives less exposure and less agitation to mimic TX400 curve.
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?