Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]After the divorce, when all you have is the M9 and 0.95, you will still be smiling. On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 3:12 PM, simon jessurun <simon.apekop at gmail.com>wrote: > thx i liked tmax and across but didnt come close to what i could do > with techpan.Only tried a few rolls but result amazed me . Even on my > consumer scanner no detectable grain at A0 print sizes . > Spur and copex i had forgotten about those . > thank you very much for your comments > simon > almaty \rkz > > On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Tim Gray <tgray at 125px.com> wrote: > > On Apr 02, 2012 at 01:42 AM +0930, Marty Deveney wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Tim Gray <tgray at 125px.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> What always confuses me is that T-MAX 100 wasn't mentioned. Also a > good > >>> film. > >> > >> > >> I don't mention it because it also has (to me) a somewhat odd spectral > >> response: > > > > > > Understood. The T-Max films do have a different spectral sensitivity, > but > > in my experience, most films differ in this respect. Actually, Techpan > had > > extended red response, so if that's important to the original poster, I'm > > not sure any of these is a good match. > > > > I wasn't really only pointing the finger at you. More of a statement > about > > these kinds of discussions online. T-Max 100 always seems to be left > out. > > > > I saw a comparison between these four films on rangefinderforum a couple > > months ago. Unfortunately, the scans are no longer on line. The films > > weren't identified at first and people guessed which picture was which > film. > > It was interesting to see what people guessed - they placed their > favorite > > films with the pictures they liked the most. One of the scans looked > > noticeably worse than the others (could have been the development, the > film, > > or the scanning) and that was the one that several people said was T-Max. > > The one that many people liked the most was the actual T-Max shot though > > most people thought it was something else. Once the results were > revealed, > > several people were shocked to find out how grainy the PanF+ actually > was. > > > > Of course, it was more of a test of those four films, developed in the > > manner they were developed, and scanned the way they were scanned. I'm > sure > > the one film that looked bad could have looked much better had it been > > developed differently. What I thought was interesting is that the test > > seemed to highlight a bias against T-Max films by many. > > > > Obviously, if you don't like T-Max 100, you are free to not like it. > All of > > these four films are probably different enough from Techpan in various > ways > > that I'd rather just mention all four and try not to let my biases enter > in. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Chris Saganich www.imagebrooklyn.com