[SET Man]

Hey!

     Surprisingly YES! 

     And I thought that Kodak stop film research. But here we are in 2008 they bought out a new and improved one of my favorite B&W film!



http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw/tMax400.jhtml

     Even though it had been a long while since I actually use B&W film, develop and print B&W... the last time was in Nov 2005  I am very excited about this! 

    T-MAX 400 had always been one of my favorite B&W film,  pretty much my default film. Other B&W films are T-MAX 100 and Tri-X. Depending on what I will be shooting I will choose what will be best from those 3 films.

    Seeing this I think I might have to buy a roll and try it. The only problem is the printing part. Developing is not a problem. But I haven't done any printing at my current place yet. And it seems to be hard then my previous apartment 

     But! I'm all getting itchy thinking about this now! Well, let's see how it goes.

Take care,
Buddy

[gsm18439]

I prefer Ilford XP-2. But maybe I should try the new T-Max 400.

[toocool4]

It would be nice to try it out, I normally use ILFORD HP5 Plus for that speed. I use to love the T-Max 3200.

I still prefer B&W film, I was using ILFORD HP5 Plus / FP4 Plus last month while I was in New York last month.

Chris

[SET Man]

I prefer Ilford XP-2. But maybe I should try the new T-Max 400.

Hey!

   Ilford XP-2 is a C-41 film. I once tried to prints for a friend from his XP-2 neg. Somehow I just could not get those prints to look like my prints from real B&W neg. I guess I'm not used to it.

    Of course XP-2 were made to be develop in C-41 of which is color processing and print on color paper. Good for those who want B&W that could be drop off at local color lab.

It would be nice to try it out, I normally use ILFORD HP5 Plus for that speed. I use to love the T-Max 3200.

I still prefer B&W film, I was using ILFORD HP5 Plus / FP4 Plus last month while I was in New York last month.

Chris

    Chris, I've used Ilford in the past. Actually my first roll of B&W film where Ilford I think it was FP4.

    Ilford film have a different feel to it compared to Kodak. There are kinds of subject that I might go for Ilford.

     I'm pretty sure that you will find the final print from T-MAX 400 different than HP5 or Delta 400. The later Delta 400 came out to compete with T-MAX 400.

    BTW... I find that T-MAX 400 is less forgiving when developing than Tri-X and HP5. So, remember to be more precise.

Take care,
Buddy

[gsm18439]

I like the grain structure and tonal qualities of Ilford XP-2. However, I must confess that I do not do my own printing so I do not know the issues involved. But I have used Ilford XP-2 for decades and like the results. I tried the Kodak equivalent and did not like the results.



http://www.garysmintz.com/

[SET Man]

I like the grain structure and tonal qualities of Ilford XP-2. However, I must confess that I do not do my own printing so I do not know the issues involved. But I have used Ilford XP-2 for decades and like the results.



http://www.garysmintz.com/

Hey!

    Great photos there!

     No, don't get me wrong XP-2 is a great film. It is just that I'm not use to printing from it.

     Ilford were the first to put out B&W film that could be process and print with C-41... great idea don't ya think?  See it works for you

Take care,
Buddy
   

[mjosef]

Interesting...I used TMax400 a couple times over a decade ago. HP5 used to be my mainstay high speed B&W way back when, I then moved to XP-1, and ended up with Delta400 when it first came out, got a couple rolls in my fridge still. I also got a 100ft. bulk can of FP4 in there too...Buddy, you want it? Its probably long expired but has been kept refridgerated(unopened) over the years.
I love the Delta tone.

[SET Man]

Interesting...I used TMax400 a couple times over a decade ago. HP5 used to be my mainstay high speed B&W way back when, I then moved to XP-1, and ended up with Delta400 when it first came out, got a couple rolls in my fridge still. I also got a 100ft. bulk can of FP4 in there too...Buddy, you want it? Its probably long expired but has been kept refridgerated(unopened) over the years.
I love the Delta tone.

Hey!

   Thanks for the offer but I think I still some of my film left in my ice box also 

   Yes, I've tried Delta 400. It seem to have a smoother look to it vs. higher contrast and sharper with T-MAX 400. For shooting people I might go with the Delta 400 for a smoother look if that's is what you are looking for.

   Anyway, I haven't talk about film with anybody for a long time now or even developing and printing any.  Actually I was just checking my darkroom stuff finding film can and etc.

Take care,
Buddy

[mjosef]

Same here...I don't really travel in the film circles anymore. I started developing my own XP1 after the first couple rolls came back with multiple scratches on the negs...figured I could do a better job and I was right. 
I have all my darkroom gear...of course I haven't really 'seen' it for almost 6years. 
Wonder what my enlarger is worth nowadays...probably not much...the Schnider (?) lens might be worth double what I paid for it back in the 80's.

[JohnR]

I have been using Tri-X only recently. I like how it turns out in the finished images, although sometimes it seems a bit on the grainy side.

How does T-Max 400 compare?

[SET Man]

I have been using Tri-X only recently. I like how it turns out in the finished images, although sometimes it seems a bit on the grainy side.

How does T-Max 400 compare?

Hey!

    T-MAX 400 is definitely sharper and have tighter grain than Tri-X. Also, to me T-MAX seems to get better detail in shadow area.

 For classic 50's looks I would go with the Tri-X. But let's say for architect shot I would go with the T-MAX. But of course it is all depend on what you want the final image to look and feel like.

    But T-MAX is less forgiving than Tri-X at developing so you have to be more precise with it.

Take care,
Buddy