Well, TMax 400 is a film designed for use at EI 400 or thereabouts. While it might make sense to you to compare it to Delta 3200, you have to remember that in order to get a useful comparison between two films, you have to develop them to the same contrast, or you are comparing fire trucks to bananas. You want apples to apples.

Picture quality between TMY and D3200 should be compared with the TMY at 400 and D3200 at maybe 1,000. Then, of course they will behave differently when you start pushing them. At 3200 TMY will not have been designed to record as much shadow detail as D3200.

For certain practical matters, it does make sense to compare the two films - at the EIs you intend to expose them at. That's for sure. But a technical comparison between the two is something different entirely. I think the Kodak data sheet on TMY states that the film can be used at 1600 with acceptable results, and 3200 with compromised results, all while D3200 is designed to be used at those speeds, with little to no image deterioration.

How a negative scans will bear very little impact on how it prints in the darkroom, by the way. The scanner is a linear device that within its range records the tonal information of the film in linear fashion. Your enlarging paper has a very different range, and there are all sorts of tricks to get tonality out of a negative where a scanner cannot, especially dense negatives where the scanner might not see through the tones much at all.


Quote Originally Posted by Dr Croubie View Post
I've never thought about it that way, but it makes perfect sense. I've used Delta3200 at ei1600, ei3200, ei4000, and ei6400 (all lab-dev, next rolls will be home-dev in Xtol or Microphen), and I've used TMax400 at ei400, ei800, ei1600, and ei3200, most lab-dev but recently some of my own in Xtol.
Frankly, the Delta3200 craps all over the TMax, hands down, ei1600 and upwards. For my usage (spotlights on people on stage, large range from bright faces to dark backgrounds and 90% of the frame is Zone 1), only Delta leaves anything noticeable in the shadows. With the TMax, I scan and I scan and pull tone curves all over the place to get something respectable, sometimes it woks and sometimes it doesn't, but the Delta just always works (that also means that if I ever do a real wet-print, the TMax will probably be useless).

Below ei1600 I haven't shot the Delta3200, only Tmax400 at ei800 and ei400. But I suppose that the same will still hold true even as low as 800, the Delta will just have more shadow detail.

As for lab pricing, it depends where you go of course. I shot some of my first rolls of Delta3200 at ei3200, gave them to the lab and didn't say anything, they devved at 3200 without asking and they were perfect. Next time I asked them to 'push to ei4000' and they charged me 50% more (even though technically the ei3200 rolls were also a push). Another time I shot at 6400, got a different guy at the lab dropping them off, he asked what ei, I said ei6400, and he charged me regular price. Haven't shot it since, but next time I'm devving my own so I won't have to worry.