Kodak what?

[ezwriter]

My D76 dev chart shows

professional TMAX 100 for 9 mins

and
TMAX 100 professional for 6.5 mins

wha??
the film i been using is labelled Professional TMAX 100 100TMX
No wonder Kodak is going under, its too confusing!
And tonite i noticed the large type 100 TMAX on the film can, some are black, some purple. Different years?

[Gerald C Koch]

Some years ago Kodak reformulated their films in order to use new coating machines and changed their names. The new names have the film speed indicated first as in 100 TMX. Older stock will have the name TMAX 100 or something similar.

Another example would be new 400TX and old Tri-X 400. The design of the packaging also changed and these changes should have been a flag to re-read the film insert. There were numerous ads and articles in magazines about the change.

So the problem is not with Kodak.

[Ian C]

The name and packaging changes differentiate different emulsions. The change took place in, I think, 2007. Films made from 2007 onward are referenced in the 2007 Kodak 4016 PDF.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...4016/f4016.pdf

The older versions of T-Max 100 developed in T-Max Developer used the following temperature/time combinations for small-tank processing:

20°C, 8 minutes (current version 7.5minutes)

21°C, 7.5 minutes (current version 7 minutes)

22°C, 7 minutes (current version 6.5 minutes)

24°C, 6 ½ minutes (current version 6 ¼ minutes)

The emulsions were changed, not the developer. Don’t put much faith in the Massive Development Chart. Some values are correct. Some became obsolete as emulsions changed. Some have always been wrong. Trust the film-maker’s data. Better still, do your own testing using the maker’s data as a starting point.

Here’s the older data in the 2002 Kodak PDF F32

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...bs/f32/f32.pdf

[pentaxuser]

The OP mentions "my D76 dev chart" which I had assumed to be the Kodak chart. If it is then there is a 2.5 mins difference which is much larger than the times differences in Tmax dev for the emulsion changes.

Maybe the OP was referring to the MDC? I don't know. However if not, then this does seem a large change and I understand his reference to "confusing"

pentaxuser

[Ian Grant]

The reality is Kodak have always been poor at being clear and accurate when products change, films like Tri-x are 5th or 6th generation since. 1938 but that's not reflected in the name,

Ian

[polyglot]

At least with some colour emulsions they put a "-version" suffix, e.g. 400VC-2 and 400VC-3. Would have been better if they did that for B&W too... but they didn't.

If you're using current film stock and not old expired stuff, look up the film's datasheet instead of the developer's datasheet. It will have the right time for D76.

[StoneNYC]

The reality is Kodak have always been poor at being clear and accurate when products change, films like Tri-x are 5th or 6th generation since. 1938 but that's not reflected in the name,

Ian

It must have been especially confusing when there were 3 versions of 135 film haha... but yes I agree, kodak doesn't seem to make much sense with changes, though Fuji's doesn't either, why is velvia 50 V50 and Velvia 100 V100 and Velvia 100F V100F instead of RVP RDP RVPIII or whatever the hell they are, I can't keep track and they don't match up to the names, all these film companies don't seem to get it, except Ilford which seems pretty straight forward... and don't get me started on developers... lol

[Gerald C Koch]

Many, I would be tempted to say most, manufacturers make unannounced incremental improvements to their product. It is only when a new product differs significantly from the older one when such a change is announced. Kodak cannot be faulted anymore than say Ilford. When a signmificant change was made to Ilford's films they added "Plus" to the name. Kodak's name change is exactly equivalent. When in doubt as to film processing it is a good idea to always check the manufacturer's instructions. Independent data like the MDC are usually not up to date and the site is known to contain errors.

[Ian Grant]

It must have been especially confusing when there were 3 versions of 135 film haha... but yes I agree, kodak doesn't seem to make much sense with changes, though Fuji's doesn't either, why is velvia 50 V50 and Velvia 100 V100 and Velvia 100F V100F instead of RVP RDP RVPIII or whatever the hell they are, I can't keep track and they don't match up to the names, all these film companies don't seem to get it, except Ilford which seems pretty straight forward... and don't get me started on developers... lol

There used to be 3 differing versions of Tri-X (same generation) when I began photography in the 1960's and the Kodak film developer datasheets listed different times for each.

Tri-X was made in at least 3 factories in the 1960's, Eastman Kodak (Rochester), Kodak Canada, and Kodak Ltd (Harrow, UK), just before WWII it was also made in Hungary. The differences in speed/dev times depended on which country the Tri-X was made which was printed on the boxes. Each company supplied specific markets so in most cases you wouldn't come accross the other two versions, but of course this was critical to photo journalists travelling around the world.

Ian

[ezwriter]

Thanks for that info! yes i was referring the dev chart on the D 76 package. So i guess with new TMAX, it would be 9 mins then?
And why the black/purple film cans? did i get some old film somewhere?