Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tim Atherton wrote: > Interesting article in the new Photo Techniques. They only tested 35 mm (and > not Tri-X 320), But found that: > > there was almost no difference in dev times in the emulsions they compared - > old and new > > Curve characteristics old and new were almost identical. > > Biggest difference was grain - most emulsions were improved grain wise. > Especially Tri-X. The Exception was T-Max400, which was now MORE grainy. In > fact Tri-X had improved so much, it was now less grainy than T-Max400.. > > Testing was done by the ex-kodak product developers who developed Xtol and > other things. > > Be interesting to see if this holds true for sheet film > > BTW - they couldn't figure out where Kodak got there new, and sometimes > wildly different development times from. > > Their advice was to stick with what you've always done for a said film, and > then see if there are any big differences. I'm interested in knowing whether anyone has tried the new Tri-X and if so, what their results are. I read the article as well and it was kind of funny that two of Kodak's ex-employees, who are experts in the field, couldn't figure out where Kodak got their new wacky development times. Rolfe - -- Rolfe Tessem | Lucky Duck Productions, Inc. rolfe@ldp.com | 96 Morton Street (212) 463-0029 | New York, Ny 10014 - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html