However much fun it is to mourn the old films we have lost,
the the films which replaced them are better. Here are a selection of Kodak MTF and Grain/Granularity charts for your entertainment.
If you aren't comfortable reading an MTF chart, you might look at where the curve crosses the 50% Response line (vertical axis) to see the practical limit of that film's Spatial Frequency. This is a handy snapshot of what the film can give you.
For instance, Tri-X gives you 60 cycles at 50% contrast. It has a Granularity of 17 (fine). TMZ gives you 80 cycles at 50% contrast. The Granularity is 18.
There are two questions one might ask. The common one is, " Kodak doesn't know what it is talking about"; the second is, "Hmm, I wonder what I can do to improve my pictures ?".
Take squint at TMY2 & Verichrome Pan; and if you feel strong, compare TMX to Tech Pan and Panatomic. For that matter, take a long, hard look at TMY2 and Panatomic X.
Have Fun !
.
Last edited by df cardwell; 02-08-2010 at 01:04 PM.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
Yup. I've been saying that for years. Kodak looks to be the only company out there improving B&W film, but they are doing an amazingly excellent job at it. TMY-2 is just scary good in LF.
Kodak has set the bar so high it's no wonder that Harmon/Ilford, and to a lesser extent Fuji, aren't willing to compete. And Kodak has shown no indication it will stop improving B&W any time soon.
I agree Don, in my opinion the most significant leaps forward in analogue photography in the last twenty or thirty years have been in films and chemistry, more so than the innovations in cameras and lenses.
But reading charts is not the same a shooting images. Many people liked the tonal rendering of older films, and with larger formats, granularity and ultimately the micro-sharpness improvements with modern emulsions just don't matter.
I'm not sure that improvements are always for the better. The improved films seem more sterile and characterless to me. But then, if one wants old-fashioned film, there are always Efke and Foma.
But reading charts is not the same a shooting images. Many people liked the tonal rendering of older films, and with larger formats,....
Darkroom Legend #12 !
Tonal rendering depends ONLY on exposure and development. You can get the same tonality from any appropriate combination of film and developer.
The chart is no more than a mathematical description of what the film is doing. Here is Kodak's glorious Portrait Pan, Paul Strand's favorite film, long and gone these many years. You can reproduce it exactly with TXP. When we run out of TXP, you can do it with TMY2.
TMY2 in Edwal 10 or 12, or HC-110 or DK-50 ? Exact match.
Really, we can !
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
Spectral sensitivity, however, has nothing to do with exposure or development, and that's the main thing I don't like about T-Max films--they look too much like B&W video. It might be possible to tweak that by filtering it differently on the camera than other B&W films, but I used TMX and TMY for around 10 years as my main films when I mainly shot 35mm and ultimately realized that by shooting larger formats, I could think less about grain and more about tone, and since then, I haven't shot much T-Max.
TMY-II does seem more attractive than TMY in the clumpy grain area.
I don't do much posting here anymore. I am trying to make more pictures.
Side by side, my Tri-X negs and TMY-2 negs in 120 print so similarly that I can't tell them apart. Old school this, and t-grain that - just go use it, print it, and work it until you like it.
Thanks for posting, Don.
Originally Posted by df cardwell
Darkroom Legend #12 !
Tonal rendering depends ONLY on exposure and development. You can get the same tonality from any appropriate combination of film and developer.
The chart is no more than a mathematical description of what the film is doing. Here is Kodak's glorious Portrait Pan, Paul Strand's favorite film, long and gone these many years. You can reproduce it exactly with TXP. When we run out of TXP, you can do it with TMY2.
TMY2 in Edwal 10 or 12, or HC-110 or DK-50 ? Exact match.
Spectral sensitivity, however, has nothing to do with exposure or development
Yes, David. Good point. But that IS a film-by-film thing.
But it is ALWAY necessary to see for yourself.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
The reality is that the films from all three major manufacturers of B&W film are excellent and if you exercise the right degree of control & craft it makes little difference who's film's you use in practice. That's been my experience as I switched from Agfa, when they stopped sheet film to Tmax 100/400 and more recently to Delta 100/400 and HP5.
Adv Reply
Originally Posted by PHOTOTONE 
