And you know this how? And the alleged T-grains? Since 1989? How does that fit?
The best shot we have, hey, it's just for fun now, is to make sense of the DX numbers.
It's cheap for a reason. It's some anonymous movie duplication film stock, very thin base, suffers tremendously from light piping, grain is comparable to what you'd expect from a 200 or 400 speed film although TMY2 will be somewhat less grainy. Quite pronounced toe too. Don't get me wrong, I like it for the occasional project, but it's unfit for general purpose use IMO.
I was talking about polypan F; see my quote.And you know this how?
Aha ....yes I was in the same side before you just linked but I overlooked this picture :Trendline, the general response to your recent postings is, no, no, and no. Some of your thoughts have already been discussed. The seller very specifically says "T-grain." http://www.ultrafineonline.com/ult400.html
I was talking about polypan F; see my quote.
realy ? Well AgX that is new for me - wonder about !Still available fresh in the USA.
I was talking about polypan F; see my quote.
It's cheap for a reason. It's some anonymous movie duplication film stock, very thin base, suffers tremendously from light piping, grain is comparable to what you'd expect from a 200 or 400 speed film although TMY2 will be somewhat less grainy. Quite pronounced toe too. Don't get me wrong, I like it for the occasional project, but it's unfit for general purpose use IMO.
Why are we discussing PolyPan and Kodak Ultramax in this thread?
I thought this thread was about the Ultrafine T-grain 400ISO film, about which I previously asked and nobody seems to know.
At this juncture...rather than speculate who makes it....has anyone used it and can you share the results? Have you tried pushing or pulling it?
That is correct Paul : 7361,7276,5233 a.s.o.No, you never said that. And as already noted, nothing to do with the question at hand. And Kodak never, to the best of my knowledge, put names on their professional movie stocks, just those four digit numbers.
People erroneously think with T-grain only at consumer films.realy ? Well AgX that is new for me - wonder about !
Why did Agfa not market this film to photographers in 2007 ?People erroneously think with T-grain only at consumer films.
Last one of this chromogenic films (Konika?) can't remember jet - I gave for commercial lab development came back with prints of piggy pink colorNo! Both films were introduced the same day,
Seemingly as the Agfa film was cancelled after some years, in hindsight peope believe erroneously it was a copy.
To the contrary: Agfa most efficiently exploited the basic concept yielded by employing chromogenic film at B&W.
But this films was made (later) for confortable workflow FOR Labs (printing onto c41 paper)!
with regards
OK, yes, to the unenlightened. As I've mentioned T grains have made there way into many color negative films, including Kodak professional movie films for many years. I've no idea about slide films.People erroneously think with T-grain only at consumer films.
Paul - what you stated last is not realy "untrue"! ....sorryAs we wander in the conversational desert hundreds of kilometers from my original posting question.......
When I was using Arista100 it was Ilford.And you never thought you'd find something as good as something else? I guess you didn't live through the Arista 100 and 400 films a few years back. Absolutely, positively Plus-X and Tri-X. It was certainly possible that the UF UM was Kodak. Or, Delta.
When I was using Arista100 it was Ilford.
Edited: Whoops, my mistake -- it was Arista B&W Film ISO 125 that I used in 8x10 sheets (Ilford). Something sounded wrong with my answer and so I dug out an old 8x10 film box. The box has some 10+ year old (sometime between '03 and '06) exposed x-ray film of my boys in the backyard...according to what I wrote on the box. Hmmmmmmmm....
Because they, like Harman, may make as much or more from their business making films for others as they do with their own lines.Paul, why would Foma make a custom T-grain and not have it in their own product line?
Because they, like Harman, may make as much or more from their business making films for others as they do with their own lines.
There are, for example, no distribution or marketing costs associated with designing and manufacturing film for others.
All they need to do is make sure that the film is different from their own products.
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?