Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by Karim Ghantous, Feb 23, 2018.
Just got a shipping notification from B&H
Mine's in an order with some B/O stuff to start the developing thing. Looking forward to trying something new.
I placed a preorder for Kodak P3200 with Cinestill's website on 2/23 and received it on 3/17. I was actually impressed that it arrived that quickly as I was informed that nothing would ship until late March/Mid April. I'll run a roll tonight when I get home from work and post some samples.
I finally was notified my P3200 order with CineStill has shipped. Should arrive Wednesday or Thursday.
This....all of it (especially the first part).
Remember that at the time TMZ was introduced Kodak had no dedicated high speed workflow other than pushing Tri-X via 3rd party developers (Acufine / Diafine), and Royal-X was painfully outdated (if you could find it). When TMZ was shot at it's true speed, which is around ISO 1000, it produced normal contrast and lush shadow detail, which is something Tri-X couldn't do even in Acufine. So, as a journalist at the time it was easier to meet printing guidelines for density requirements if you needed ~1600 speed with low contrast. It was briefly popular as a fashion film.
The problem was that TMZ has godzilla sized grain, absurdly low shelf life, expensive, sensitive to fog, and required TMAX developer for full shadow detail. In Acufine it looks really good up to 3200 or so. I was one of the few press guys who messed with it when it came out, and only for niche situations requiring high speed and low contrast. Tri-X (and then TMY 400) souped in Acufine or Diafine produces far finer grain (see the example in this thread).
Most people are going to buy it, then send it to a local lab, which is the same problem since the dawn of time with conventional B&W film. The lab will then almost certainly under develop it because most labs still running conventional film lines are running Ilford developers, and they are terribly mismatched for something like TMZ. Also realize TMZ is horrendously sensitive to ambient radiation and fog levels and degrades quickly near it's expiration date.
If Kodak wants to bring back something pictorially unique then Panatomic-X is my first choice followed by TechPan. Panatomic-X is easy to process (except in sheet form) and restores the classic silver heavy tone range with fine grain lost by TMX 100 and it's Acros clones. IMO, FP4 is a better film than Plus-X and still available.
Panatomic-X lasts close to forever. TMZ doesn't. I have some "Develop before Dec 1961" Panatomic-X that I expect to work just fine.
I have some TMZ much more recent that I expect will be bad.
Very true about Panatomic-X. A few years ago I shot a roll that had an 1964 expiration date. Processed in HC110 dilution B for about five minutes and it didn't appear to have any significant fog. And, the ASA rating in the package was 40 rather than the later 32.
I see that B&H sold out of TMZ. It will be interesting to see how it does after the initial bloom.
The initial sell-out is a good sign, but I wonder how much of it is folks like me who either just wanted to give this film another chance or were curious about it.
If I like what I see when I get around to processing(hopefully this weekend) I'll buy more. If not, I won't get anymore.
I doubt my 5 roll order was that significant, but if the run was small(a few thousand rolls) it doesn't take THAT many folks ordering 5 or 10 rolls to sell it out. You could also have had folks making big orders that won't order again for a while, but given how poorly this stores that doesn't seem overly wise. If I use it more, I see it being ordered on an as-needed basis rather than ordering 50-100 rolls at a time like I do with some other films. 6 rolls of TMZ is enough to get free shipping from B&H.
I just started a new thread about labs that can properly develop P3200:
Labs That Develop P3200 Properly...???
ooooooooooo panatonic ex.... loved it. i still have a few cassettes somewhere. expired 1968
I just noticed: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/uat/files/wysiwyg/pro/chemistry/j86.pdf
that TMZ has devleopment times up to 85F/29C, but others only up to 75F/24C.
I got the data sheet to see what the capacity is for T-Max developer.
It seems to be 48 rolls/gallon (1:4 diluted), with increasing times, so 48 rolls for the smaller bottle.
The 48 rolls/gallon is 3 rolls/8oz, which you might get diluting from concentrate for each roll.
HC-110 is over 100 rolls/bottle, but costs about twice as much for the bottle.
Separate names with a comma.