difference between 135 and 120 formats with same film?

[willy_boots]

<p>I recently heard someone talking about how the underexposure latitude in print film X has less latitude in 120 format than 35mm. Is this the case with any films? I would think it would be the same because my understanding of film production is that a certain type of film is produced and then cut into its various rolls and sheets, so it should be uniform regardless of format.</p>

[marc_rochkind]

Perhaps what was meant is that usually IQ is less critical for larger formats because, whether projected, printed, or scanned, it's enlarged less. Less noticeable grain, reticulation, etc.

[walter_degroot]

<p>you may notice that some B&W films seem to be different products in 120 or 35,,. different ISO and different development times.<br>

I really do not know if there is a real difference,.<br>

Some films may be identical no matter if they are 120 or 35,,<br>

I think it is likely that c-41 films would be the same<br>

as the processing is standardized.<br>

I remember the 120 tri-x 320 and the 35mm tri-x 400.</p>

 

[john_shriver]

<p>The anti-halation treatments may be different, for instance a different amount of dye in the film base in 135. But this really only affects the base density, not the actual image created.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>The film base thickness differs between formats that a given film comes in, 35mm, 120, 220, sheets.<br>

I know of no differences in the emulsion between formats.</p>

[brian_quinn2]

<p>Many people find a slight (maybe 20%) difference in contrast between format sizes. So development time is altered a bit to compensate. But then again you are using different camera and enlarging equipment based on negative size and this may also alter contrast somewhat.</p>

[jeff_livacich]

<p>Tri-X 320 is no longer available in 120/220. Tri-X 400 is still available in 120.<br>

I don't know of any films of the exact same name that are different in different formats, but maybe there are. Film base thickness usually differs, though 120 and 220 are usually the same. Film base type often differs, too.</p>

[profhlynnjones]

<p>This is an interesting thought. When testing identical emulsions, we should always do the testing after subtracting the film base plus fog becaused 35mm has one full f stop or more of neutral density (anti halation) while 120/220 has only 1/5th or 1/6th of an f stop of FBF. Failing to make this correction can create a pretty significant quality control picture.<br>

Lynn</p>

[paolo_solari_bozzi1]

<p>Does anyone know if it is possible that Tri-x 400 at EI 320 ISO in both formats 35mm and 120 roll, both developed with ID-11 1:1 for the same time and temperature give different results? I found the 35mm perfect and the 120 roll a bit too dense, hence I should use a smaller dev time. In other words, are the films different in any way, although sold under the same name and ISO?</p>