Can someone tell me what the point of Delta 3200 and Tmax 3200 is? Both HP5 and Kentmere 400 have less grain when pushed to ISO 1600, than the 3200 films have shot at ISO 1000 (which is their actual rating).
I basically use the '3200' films for grain, not speed.
Desmolicious wrote:
Can someone tell me what the point of Delta 3200 and Tmax 3200 is? Both HP5 and Kentmere 400 have less grain when pushed to ISO 1600, than the 3200 films have shot at ISO 1000 (which is their actual rating).
I basically use the '3200' films for grain, not speed.
My preferences are quite the opposite
I do not like anything in my medium (film qualities) that adds or subtracts from the visual qualities of a scene that I am photographing. I never felt like I need or appreciate grain or color shifts in my images. I choose anything above ISO 100 exclusively for the purpose of shortening of exposure time that could get quite long with large format film.
theHUN wrote:
...my motivation was to have *one* recipe for multiple film stocks..
Many-many years ago when I just started with film I ran my tests with Delta 100 and TXP 320. Never bothered with densitometer and used a scanner to assess the results instead. I never intended to do darkroom printing anyway .
According to my tests both films were performing true to their box speeds.
Never used anything but HC-110 with 1 ml of syrup (concentrate) to 100ml of water ratio with the amount per run proportional to 400ml of diluted solution per 4 sheets of 4x5 , rotary development in a JOBO expert drum for 10-12 minutes at 18C. Although I almost always use distilled water from a grocery store, usage of tap water makes no difference to my eye. Some years later I added Rollei IR 400 and TMax 400 (when it still made sense financially) with no testing both rated at ISO 400 (box speed again), using the same development formula and times and the results have been absolutely satisfactory to my eye and taste. Not a single failure ever due to development formula. With sheet film I often develop a mix and match of all the above emulsions in the same run with no hesitation.
I found out that with a JOBO multi-tank and reels, to prevent an uneven development along the edges where the film touches the reels, I have to double the amount of my developer solution (800ml per 4 sheets of 4x5 or 1 roll of 120 (equal surface area))
And if it matters, I tend to expose my B&W almost as I would expose my slide film ( I prefer to work in soft light) with an error towards overexposure of highlights if the lighting conditions call for it.
Exposing Rollei IR 400 for IR images is a totally different story but the development formula remains exactly the same.
Took a trip to the Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum in McMinville, Oregon about an hour south west of where I live. Took the M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SC V2 and a whole bunch of Tri-X. Film was exposed at ISO 200 and developed in Rodinal 50:1
Desmolicious wrote:
Can someone tell me what the point of Delta 3200 and Tmax 3200 is? Both HP5 and Kentmere 400 have less grain when pushed to ISO 1600, than the 3200 films have shot at ISO 1000 (which is their actual rating).
I basically use the '3200' films for grain, not speed.
It's worth reading these two posts by Johnny Martyr:
Kodak itself says the nominal speed is 800 or 1000.
He said that in his own post, but he also pointed out that the DX codes rate the film at 3200:
"Armchair available light photographers delight in pointing out that Delta 3200 has a native ISO of 1000 and TMAX P3200 has a native ISO of 800. On a technical level, this is not misinformation. However, I am of the opinion that the constant restating of this as well as some incomplete, inaccurate tutorials about how to shoot these films has spawned not only an inaccurate belief that these films are “best” shot at their native ISO but even a bit of FEAR of shooting them at their box speed or higher.
I say, forget about this native ISO stuff!
For all intents and purposes, 3200 ISO is the NORMAL speed of Delta 3200 and TMAX P3200.
The DX codes printed on their canisters read 3200 by cameras and minilabs. Therefore, this is how Ilford and Kodak want these films to be rated and processed.
The films are not called Delta 1000 or TMAX P800, they’re called 3200. This is not just marketing as people will lament on the interwebs."
Maybe it is just marketing, though. I tried TMax P3200 once (at 3200) and don't think I'll use it again. I like grain but that was too much even for me.
Back when I used to drop off 3200 films to be developed, the first question they asked was what it was rated at. Never got that question w other films. That's because they know if I said 'box speed/3200' they would have to push it 2 stops in dev.
So I disagree w Martyr, the 3200 is marketing when any lab needs to push it to get 3200. That marketing gimmick is reinforced w the DX coding. Otherwise people would say why does it say 3200 on the box but my camera sets it to 1000?
Kodak/Ilford are letting whoever develops the film take up the slack.
But, the right tool for the right job - and with this film this is the tool you use if you want grainy pics.
p.s. I have an issue with him saying "Armchair photographers..." That is suggesting 'they' are not actually using the film and just parroting information. Which is a broad brush to paint with.
The bottom line is Ilford and Kodak state these are ISO 800/1000 films. Fact. The rest is his opinion.
p.p.s this is why we need a film section!!! So we can discuss all aspects of film photography, and not have comments lost in the one film image thread.
Delta 3200 $16/roll @ 1000, versus Kentmere 400 $6/roll @ 1600. As you can see the Kentmere at almost 1/3rd of the cost has less grain @ 1600 than Delta has @ 1000:
The actual film speed is easy to determine instead of relying on someone's opinion.
Set film speed set to ISO 3200 in the cemara. Meter off of your grey card in M mode. Make 1st exposure. That will be your Zone V exposure. Now bracket your exposure down to Zone 0 (5 additional exposures) each time reducing the exposure by 1 stop. Develop for Normal. Evaluate the 6 frames that you shot for this test. If you see hints of details in the 5th exposure with the 6th frame being completely blank - the film speed is 3200. If in the 4th , with the 5th and 6th being complete blank - then it is 1600, etc.
Keep in mind that overdevelopment of film does not increase film speed.
In other words, increasing development times does not compensate for lack of details due to underexposure. Overdevelopment increases the contrast, nothing more.
Desmolicious wrote:
See, it's great for images like that! Dig it.
Yes, I might use it again for concerts, but that's pretty much the only scenario I can think of. Actually that was TMax P3200, not Delta; I still haven't given Delta 3200 a try.
bjhurley wrote:
Yes, I might use it again for concerts, but that's pretty much the only scenario I can think of. Actually that was TMax P3200, not Delta; I still haven't given Delta 3200 a try.
