Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/28

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] should be Tmax 3200 at 1600/was TriX at 800
From: Marty Deveney <>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:00:54 -0800 (PST)

Ted and Gary and others:

Ted wrote:
>If this is true what developer and times do you use when you actually >shoot these films? Or have you just read something others have said?
>I use Neopan 1600 at 1600 and soup it in XTOL 1:1 and get very good >results.

>This at 1600, or occasionally @ 3200 I use for indoor shooting and the >grain is quite good as 11X14 prints.

>However, one is always looking to improve their quality so why would >this film be sold and advertised as 1600 when in actual fact you say >it's really 640? Boy in that case I have a great number of massively >under exposed negatives even though they print very well.

Of course.

Gary wrote:
>Tri-x for a majority of my shoots was rated at 640 using HC-110 >dilution b for 20 seconds less than Kodak's suggestions.  640 is in my >view the sweetest spot of Tri-X.  But then I don't like using slow >films.  640 was and is my favorite position for this film.

And of course again.

Because what is being confused here is ISO and exposure index (EI).  You guys can shoot Tri-X at an *EI* of 1600 and have things work fine for your purposes, ditto for Neopan 1600.  The point of the ISO standard is that the numbers on the boxes are all calculated the same way.  Like I said, it's a starting point.  Ted shoots Neopan 1600 ( an *ISO* 640 speed film) and gets negs that he is very happy with - why?  Because he is not developing it in the standard way, neither is he looking for the same sensitometric output: in fact, almost NONE of his variables are anywhere near the ISO standard.

The point is that we develop our films to look how we want them.  We don't adhere to a strictly defined dogma that has been set *purely for the sake of international standardisation* - we have our own dogmas (some stricter than others) about how our pictures look (I hope!).

So Ted's eopan is not underdeveloped - it's just not developed like the ISO says it should be to measure it's speed in their standard way.

I use TMZ at up to 12500 and it works fine - considering what I am expecting.  The ISO, after all, have nothing to do with how I take and make photographs.  8-)



Get your Free Global e-mail address at
- --
To unsubscribe, see