Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,930   Posts: 1,585,382   Online: 978
      
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 121
  1. #51
    Jaf-Photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    For me, TMAX is excellent for documentary style photography. The fine grain and sharpness do produce a very good image.

    But for artistic and subjective shots, classic films have that arty look that you want.

    Ilford Delta is a compromise because I think it looks like a cross between t-grain and classic grain.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    409
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    It's mostly old dogs who don't like new things... Ignore them and find your own way
    arf arf

  3. #53
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Yep, that TMY-2 and FP4+ sure do look alike, which is my experience also. Confusingly similar.

    Shoot film, folks, and be happy about the choices you have. If you really must find an answer to the difference between new and old films, the only way to satisfy your own curiosity is to try it and see for yourselves.
    Use both films side by side, develop them to the same contrast, and print on the same paper. Make it an 'all other things equal' scenario and compare.

    Enjoy yourselves too! Don't pay so much attention to the 'facts' on the internet. There's a lot of misinformation out there.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  4. #54
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,680
    Images
    344
    Growl, Growl.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Slovenia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    870
    Images
    9
    The TMY picture looks like it has been shot through a light yellow filter. Different colour response.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    I don't really remember seeing "hate" for t-grain films. There are plenty of people who like the conventional-grain films better, either because they see or believe they see different outcomes, or for process reasons; but if anything I feel like I see more advocacy than denigration. (When Efke 25 was still with us, it was hard to talk about it for very long without someone saying "you should just use TMX/TMY which is better in every way and does your laundry for you too". OK, maybe I exaggerate a little.)

    The difference in shoulder shapes between, at least, the Kodak t-grain films and conventional ones is objective and real. Of course it's only one step in the process, but a process is made up of choices at various steps; personally I find I get along better with the shoulder of TX or HP5+ than that of TMX/TMY, so why change?

    (I got 1/2 on Stone's samples, by the way. The first pair I thought was pretty obvious based on the highlights, and I was right; but in the second I thought I saw the exact same difference, and I was wrong.)

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,820
    More malarkey on this thread than in a British pot pie!

  8. #58
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I've been everywhere ooooohhh yeaahhhh still I'm standing tall.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,706

    Pictures of Lily

    Quote Originally Posted by bdial View Post
    It's film. Put it in your camera, capture some photons and make something great.

    If you can only do that with this or that film developed in this or that magic brew you're missing something.

    IMHO

    Mine too!
    "He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves: and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said 'Poor old Baggins!' and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy till the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long "- JRR Tolkien, ' The Hobbit '.

  9. #59
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    then why don't you print a cropped image zoomed in to illustrate your point?
    I'm going to assume you mean "scan and show a crop" rather than print. Therein lies the problems that many of us have been trying to get you to see across various and sundry threads.

    1) The change from a physical artifact (from a negative or print) into a digital form changes the character of the result, period. Hell, printing a film to a paper hides much of the film curve from the viewer, scanning a print adds yet another layer of manipulation.

    2) The negative is an intermediate medium. If you and I are looking at a positive image, physical or digital, it has been manipulated to get to that point.

    Sure, the digital version of a physical can be manipulated to get close but it won't ever fully match, not on screen nor on paper printed from a digital file regardless of what machine prints it.

    I am not making a claim as to which medium is better or worse. All I'm saying is that switching mediums manipulates the result. Once the results are manipulated they are no longer comparable.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  10. #60
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,011
    Images
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by miha View Post
    The TMY picture looks like it has been shot through a light yellow filter. Different colour response.
    Good eye, see below...

    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    I don't really remember seeing "hate" for t-grain films. There are plenty of people who like the conventional-grain films better, either because they see or believe they see different outcomes, or for process reasons; but if anything I feel like I see more advocacy than denigration. (When Efke 25 was still with us, it was hard to talk about it for very long without someone saying "you should just use TMX/TMY which is better in every way and does your laundry for you too". OK, maybe I exaggerate a little.)

    The difference in shoulder shapes between, at least, the Kodak t-grain films and conventional ones is objective and real. Of course it's only one step in the process, but a process is made up of choices at various steps; personally I find I get along better with the shoulder of TX or HP5+ than that of TMX/TMY, so why change?

    (I got 1/2 on Stone's samples, by the way. The first pair I thought was pretty obvious based on the highlights, and I was right; but in the second I thought I saw the exact same difference, and I was wrong.)

    -NT
    So, originally this was about being shot the same, they would essentially be similar.

    So, in the barns-only image, I did use a Red filter ON BOTH, and have 2 stops difference between them (adjusting for the same filter factor for both)

    In the tree image, I used a Yellow filter, and gave 2 stops between them (and again adjusting for filter factor)

    My original purpose of this shoot was to test the response of the films edge effects on a rotary processor, since I have switched to that and so it wasn't about spectral response as much, but how each films edge effects reacted in a normal shooting situation I might come across, to which in a scene like this I would personally use filters...

    I don't think that using filters negates the fact that they both look similar with only slight differences in highlight and shadow response. Which can be attributed partly to each films response to color wavelengths (so to a small degree the filters used) but ultimately I don't think the look of the two images is so starkly different that one could say that the T-grain image is better or worse than the traditional grain image.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin