Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Condemnation?
From: imx <imxputs@knoware.nl>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:10:58 +0100

I do not recall that "the Lug" as  a collective condemned the Tmax 400 as an
inferior emulsion. If "they" did so, it is only appropriate to mention that
there is no collective (need a Borg cube) and the very fact that some
individuals are not impressed by that film is a sure indication of their
need to re-education. The Tmax 400 is an outstanding emulsion with
capablities that takes time and expertise to be appreciated. I am always
surprised by that casual "I-shot-a-few-rolls-and-I-am-not- impressed"-thing.
To know an emulsion takes some controlled experiments amd if you do not wish
to conduct them any comment is irrelevant (in a Vulkan way).
If you cannot get the results you want from Tmax 400, why blame Kodak? Maybe
look at yourself for a while and be sincere!
Most emulsions are far more capable in capturing reality than  Leica users
are prepared to acknowledge.
I could quote from Donald Duck!


Erwin  

Replies: Reply from Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com> (Re: [Leica] WAS: Condemnation? NOW: Tmax)
Reply from Jeff Moore <jbm@oven.com> ([Leica] Re: Condemnation?)
Reply from Jim Brick <jim_brick@agilent.com> ([Leica] Re: WAS: Condemnation? NOW: Tmax)
Reply from "Julian Thomas" <julianthomas@terra.es> (Re: [Leica] Condemnation?)
Reply from "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com> ([Leica] WAS: Condemnation? NOW: Tmax)