Oh. So.... Why did the Yellow Father name the film after its P2 speed,
breaking tradition? I thought films were always, I mean ALWAYS named after
their nominal (ASA in the olden days) speed. By this insane naming
convention, Tri-X is now "Tri-X 1600". How does that help anyone?
Pondering a class action suit..... :)
Lamadoo
> At 22:47 6/10/02, C.H.Ling wrote:
> >Amazing grainless with such a high speed film (EI 1600 for the
> >TMAX3200?).
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Yes . . . it surprised me too. TMax P3200 is actually an ISO 800 or ISO
> 1000 film depending on specific developing chemistry. If it's used at EI
> 3200, it must be P2 processed. As I understand it, the emulsion was
> designed to be pushed to P2 without getting too contrasty or unduly grainy
> given its speed. At EI 1600, it's comparable in granularity to Tri-X at
EI
> 400, even though the granules will be a different shape, and it backs off
> the contrast some.
>
> P3200's data sheet has information about using it at EI 800, 1600, 3200
and
> 6400. The film cartridge allows marking the latter three for P1 through
P3
> processing plus a blank space if it's used at some other EI. Found it to
> be very interesting stuff. I don't particularly care for TMax 100 or 400,
> but this looks like it's completely different. I may have to shoot some
> Tri-X at P2 (EI 1600) just to compare the two when used at the same EI.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|