If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
I happen to have all three sets of Kodak rotary-processing recommendations
for Tmax 400 in front of me: the old (prior to move to new coating facility) Publication F-32, the "new" (first generation at new coating faciity) F-4016, and the "newest" (current production, "finer grain!") F-4032. Kodak claims that the "finer grain" TMY -- the newest stuff -- has "slightly" different processing times than the generation immediately prior. If their table is to be believed -- nonsense. The data in the newest -- F-4032 -- publication, for the "finer grain" film appear, for rotary processing of sheet film, to exactly match the data in the oldest -- F-32 -- publication, for the "old coating facility" film. Time to plug in the densitometer again and hope it's still working, I suppose. I wonder what exactly Kodak is up to: did they revert production to how (and where?) it used to be before the first set of changes? -- Thor Lancelot Simon "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
In article ,
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: I happen to have all three sets of Kodak rotary-processing recommendations for Tmax 400 in front of me: the old (prior to move to new coating facility) Publication F-32, the "new" (first generation at new coating faciity) F-4016, and the "newest" (current production, "finer grain!") F-4032. The newest publication is actually F-4043. -- Thor Lancelot Simon "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
In article ,
____ wrote: In article , (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote: Time to plug in the densitometer again and hope it's still working, I suppose. I wonder what exactly Kodak is up to: did they revert production to how (and where?) it used to be before the first set of changes? They probably didn't bother to rewrite the data sheet,...just rename it. No -- they made a dramatic change in their development recommendation for the second version of the film, but now seem to have changed it back. The densitometer seems to work, so we'll see... -- Thor Lancelot Simon "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
On Mar 2, 10:00*am, (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
In article , ____ wrote: In article , (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote: Time to plug in the densitometer again and hope it's still working, I suppose. *I wonder what exactly Kodak is up to: did they revert production to how (and where?) it used to be before the first set of changes? They probably didn't bother to rewrite the data sheet,...just rename it. No -- they made a dramatic change in their development recommendation for the second version of the film, but now seem to have changed it back. The densitometer seems to work, so we'll see... -- * Thor Lancelot Simon * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to * *be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." * * * * * *- Noam Chomsky Very interested in what you learn; please let us know. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message ... I happen to have all three sets of Kodak rotary-processing recommendations for Tmax 400 in front of me: the old (prior to move to new coating facility) Publication F-32, the "new" (first generation at new coating faciity) F-4016, and the "newest" (current production, "finer grain!") F-4032. Kodak claims that the "finer grain" TMY -- the newest stuff -- has "slightly" different processing times than the generation immediately prior. If their table is to be believed -- nonsense. The data in the newest -- F-4032 -- publication, for the "finer grain" film appear, for rotary processing of sheet film, to exactly match the data in the oldest -- F-32 -- publication, for the "old coating facility" film. Time to plug in the densitometer again and hope it's still working, I suppose. I wonder what exactly Kodak is up to: did they revert production to how (and where?) it used to be before the first set of changes? -- Thor Lancelot Simon The data sheet you want is F-4043 for the "new" 400T-Max, I have no idea what 4032 is. The latest T-Max data sheet covering all of the films is F-4016 dated October 2007, however F-4043 is later and covers only the ISO-400 film. My memory is that a new data sheet was issued when production of B&W film was moved to the same plant that coats color film. At that time it was stated that while new datasheets were issued T-Max films had always been coated in this plant and there were not major changes. The "new" film is evidently actually coated on a different machine and had some adjustments made to the emulsion and to the overcoating. The overcoating affects development times because it affects the penetration of the developer into the emulsion. It has the greatest effect on "induction time" that is, the time it takes for the image to begin appearing, but this also shifts all times somewhat and is not consistent with temperature. I don't know why Kodak made these changes but suspect that the production quality had begun to drift too much. When the films were moved to the color plant it was reported that Tri-X films, which really were moved to new machines, had finer grain than before and some found the grain finer than 400T-Max. This last should have been the case and may be an indicator that the T-Max line had drifted. It is also possible that changes in the formulation of the emulsion were made. I find the suggestion in the new datasheet that edge sharpness is improved to be interesting because it suggests such a change. I don't think Kodak ever just re-writes datasheets for no reason. However, since the development charts are based on sensitometric measurements and since these measurements are made on a continuing basis for tracking the production quality, its quite possible that at some point there is enough change to warrant new overall measurements and an amended datasheet. -- --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
I happen to have all three sets of Kodak rotary-processing recommendations for Tmax 400 in front of me: the old (prior to move to new coating facility) Publication F-32, the "new" (first generation at new coating faciity) F-4016, and the "newest" (current production, "finer grain!") F-4032. Kodak claims that the "finer grain" TMY -- the newest stuff -- has "slightly" different processing times than the generation immediately prior. If their table is to be believed -- nonsense. The data in the newest -- F-4032 -- publication, for the "finer grain" film appear, for rotary processing of sheet film, to exactly match the data in the oldest -- F-32 -- publication, for the "old coating facility" film. Time to plug in the densitometer again and hope it's still working, I suppose. I wonder what exactly Kodak is up to: did they revert production to how (and where?) it used to be before the first set of changes? If anyone here needs I have an ESECO Speedmaster B&W densitometer Model T-80BD and a Bessler 45 MXT enlarger4 looking for a new home. Also have a couple of Componon S lenses, carriers and other goodies also looking. Best, Dave |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"New" TMY: same as it ever was?
In article ,
Richard Knoppow wrote: I don't think Kodak ever just re-writes datasheets for no reason. However, since the development charts are based on sensitometric measurements and since these measurements are made on a continuing basis for tracking the production quality, its quite possible that at some point there is enough change to warrant new overall measurements and an amended datasheet. I am a little surprised to see Kodak actually rewriting datasheets at all any more, and I wonder if they are using an outside contractor as they do for a number of other technical services they used to handle in-house. Have a look at the big rotary-processing table in J-109 (the Xtol datasheeet) and you'll see clear evidence they stopped work on that document in the middle -- the entries in the table for new Tmax 100 ("100TMX") are mostly left empty, and the values which are present are highly suspect (almost everything else in the table I have checked matches my measurements very closely; the 100TMX times, as far as I can tell, are just wrong). Speaking of J-109, for EI 400, Kodak has the same row of numbers for "old" and "older" TMY the XTOL STOCK 1:1 65=7.5 68=6.25 70=5.25 75=4 68=8.25 70=7.25 75=5.75 80=4.75 Now, F-32 (the "oldest" TMY datasheet) has: XTOL STOCK 1:1 68=6.25 70=5.5 72=5 75=4 68=8.25 70=7.25 72=6.75 75=5.75 The only difference is at 70F, and from other data in the charts (the data for "old TMX") one can deduce that actually this data point must just be about half way between 5.5 and 5.25, as different Kodak charts list it as one or the other consistently. F-4016 (the "old" TMY datasheet) has: XTOL STOCK 1:1 68=6.25 70=5.5 72=5 75=4 68=8.25 70=7.25 72=6.75 75=5.75 F-4043 (the "new" TMY datasheet) has: XTOL STOCK 1:1 65=7.25 68=6.5 70=6.25 72=5.75 75=5.25 65=10.75 68=9.25 70=8.5 72=7.75 75=7 I was wrong: these are *not* the times from F-32 (which were almost exactly the same times as F-4016, the only difference being the one noted above). I think I confused myself last night because the numbers in the F-4016 table do not include 65F, so my data were off by one column. These are a whole new set of times. Here is an interesting and perhaps useful fact -- if you trust the numbers for 100TMX from J-109/F-4016, which I personally do not (see above): at 68 and 70F the new 400TMX times are only 15 seconds off the new 100TMX times, for XTOL 1:1, D-76, and HC-110 -- it may be that Kodak has deliberately retuned 400TMX so that 100 and 400 can once again be run in the same tank in commercial applications. However, this will most assuredly not work with TMAX RS or XTOL stock -- the data are all over the chart for those two. -- Thor Lancelot Simon "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Album 26 Special "January 2008-3" "Lumières d'Opale" | Lumières d'Opale | Fine Art, Framing and Display | 0 | February 7th 08 12:32 PM |
Album 26 Special "January 2008-3" "Lumières d'Opale" | Lumières d'Opale | Digital Photography | 0 | February 7th 08 12:30 PM |
Album 24 Special "January 2008-1" "Lumières d'Opale" | Lumières d'Opale | Digital Photography | 1 | January 8th 08 09:05 PM |
How to insert the "modified time" attribute in "date taken" attrib in batch mode | ashjas | Digital Photography | 4 | November 8th 06 09:00 PM |