 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / September 2004Discontinuation of Kodak Technical Pan
A sad day for black-and-white photography. http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 Unlike other recent film discontinuations, this one has no substitute that is anywhere close. That means there are things you can do with a camera today that you will not be able to do with a camera next year.  SignatureClear skies, Michael A. Covington Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html In rec.photo.darkroom Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote: : A sad day for black-and-white photography. : http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 : Unlike other recent film discontinuations, this one has no substitute that : is anywhere close. That means there are things you can do with a camera : today that you will not be able to do with a camera next year. It is indeed sad. Then again my understanding is that Kodak hasn't been selling very much of it the last few years. Does anyone know how the efke and J&C iso25 films compare? SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > In rec.photo.darkroom Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Does anyone know how the efke and J&C iso25 films compare? I'd suspect that even if they are good for pictorial photography, they are probably wildly different from Tech Pan when you get into scientific applications. > In rec.photo.darkroom Michael A. Covington wrote: > > Unlike other recent film discontinuations, this one > > has no substitute that is anywhere close. > Does anyone know how the efke and J&C iso25 films compare? Er, like the man said: > > this one has no substitute that is anywhere close. I have only tried the Efke 25. No contest in my book. I think TMX in Microdol-X works a whole lot better. But then there is the matter of red sensitivity. Techpan with a 25A filter is superb. And your lens becomes a functional apochromat. There is quite a difference in resolution with and without the 25A. But, spend $10 and make your own judgement. I am sure there will be a lot of heated argument coming up on this point. SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ "Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com> wrote in message news:%j44d.9104 > But then there is the matter of red sensitivity. > Techpan with a 25A filter is superb. And your lens > becomes a functional apochromat. There is quite a > difference in resolution with and without the 25A. Hmmm... "monochromat"? I would think that a narrow green filter would work even better than a red one. The aberrations in the lens are corrected for the visible spectrum, so by using only red light, you eliminate chromatic aberration but you don't get the optimum for everything else. Incidentally, one of my lenses (Olympus Zuiko 180/2.8) got demonstrably a tiny bit sharper when a skylight (1A, almost-clear) filter was added. It had a lot of chromatic aberration in the violet and near UV (as I demonstrated doing astrophotography, but the effect of the filter was also evident in terrestrial photos). And putting a yellow filter on a telephoto lens to sharpen it is an old astrophotography trick. > "Nicholas O. Lindan" <see@sig.com> wrote in message > > a 25A filter ... And your lens becomes a functional apochromat > Hmmm... "monochromat"? That's a better word. > I would think that a narrow green filter would work even better than a red > one. One would, but the blue and green wratten filters pass radiation again around 650 - 700 nM, where Techpan is still sensitive. So you are right back where you started. A red 25a, coupled with techpan's red sensitivity, cuts haze like crazy in outdoor shots. What with all the sharpness in the film, and your brand new monochromat, why have haze? And a 25a w/ TP only needs 2 stops of correction. > The aberrations in the lens are corrected for the visible spectrum, so > by using only red light, you eliminate chromatic aberration but you don't > get the optimum for everything else. There's a bit of focus shift, fanatics can just dial on down half way to the IR dot. The stuff the red filter can't fix is there without the red filter, so it obeys Hippocrates: "At the least, do no harm." > Incidentally, one of my lenses (Olympus Zuiko 180/2.8) got demonstrably a > tiny bit sharper when a skylight (1A, almost-clear) filter was added. It > had a lot of chromatic aberration in the violet and near UV (as I > demonstrated doing astrophotography, but the effect of the filter was also > evident in terrestrial photos). And putting a yellow filter on a telephoto > lens to sharpen it is an old astrophotography trick. Funny about the 1A, mostly they do zilch, though some are better than others: http://www.photo.net/equipment/filters/ B&W used to have filter curves on their web site, but now that it's Schneider I can not find them. SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ > In rec.photo.darkroom Michael A. Covington <look@ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote: > : A sad day for black-and-white photography. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Does anyone know how the efke and J&C iso25 films compare? This stuff was not that easy to use in any event, and no, the slow ISO 25 films are not remotely like it. It's basically a pan microfilm. > http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 On which it is written: > In fact I probably haven't bought a roll of Technical Pan in > ten years... and now they've discontinued it. Yes, that does seem to have been the case with a lot of people. Then there are those who go through two 20 roll packs a year. It makes a _great_ snapshot film. Same ASA as K25, so what the bitching is about with it being "too slow" I do not understand. I even use it in a Yashica T4; you have to glue a bit of ND .6 filter over the photocell, though, as the camera defaults to 100 ASA w/o a DX code. It keeps well forever. I shot a 20 year old roll I found in a box of camping gear just to see what happens: same as a new roll, and with no fog. Stock up now. SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ If you are going to stock (I'm debating it) should you wait until the expiration date to throw it into the freezer or just throw it into the freezer when you get home? I've heard that once film goes into the freezer, it is not advised to take it out until you're ready to use it. > > http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com > psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ > If you are going to stock (I'm debating it) should you wait until the > expiration date to throw it into the freezer or just throw it into the > freezer > when you get home? I've heard that once film goes into the freezer, it is > not > advised to take it out until you're ready to use it. I don't know why that would be. Kodak has been storing it in the freezer for years and then taking it out and selling it to us. What little I have left, I have in the freezer. >If you are going to stock (I'm debating it) should you wait until the >expiration date to throw it into the freezer or just throw it into the freezer >when you get home? I've heard that once film goes into the freezer, it is not >advised to take it out until you're ready to use it. Throw it in right away, if you buy a brick, then leave the rolls in their boxes, you can optionally mark the brick with the date you froze it, when you expect to use the film, take it out of the freezer a few days before you need it, but leave it in the packaging, until you actually do use it. W >Unlike other recent film discontinuations, Such as APX25 ? Which was nearly as fine grained and sharp as TP without the odd spectral sensitivity and processing mandates. >this one has no substitute that is anywhere close. I have to differ. TMX may not resolve quite as high but if you pull it to EI32 and develop in D23 or Microdol-X it is nearly as fine grained and sharp as TP. As to "It's also probably the end of the hydrogen hypersensitization era." I don't think a lot of astro-photographers are going to care. As noted at : http://www.backyardastronomy.com/chapter1314/page1.html#Anchor-These%20sect-49534 "With today's much-improved films, faster optical systems and auto-guiders for effortless long exposures, we've found hypering simply is not worth the effort. Results that rival those achieved by hypered film are now possible with off-the-shelf films right out of the box." Remember that there is still the theory that some new technologies in film emulsion engineering are going to be introduced and with significant advances in image quality and film speed. I know the technology was developed but I doubt it will ever make it to the factories. R&D investments have been slashed and manufacturers are simply profiting from products that are "good enough". Do I decry the discontinuation of TP ? You betcha ! But I resigned myself to this when Kodak discontinued Elite, Kodabromide, Ektalure, Verichrome Pan, Pan Masking Film, Ektapan, Plus-X Pan Pro and SO-132. Add in Ilfords' discontinuation of Delta 400 and Pan-F+ above the 120 format, the discontinuance of all 220 films and their recent cutbacks in marketing along with Agfa's plight. These companies are dinosaurs that were made to serve the need of government-sized institutions and have no method of being profitable with the smaller volumes. They certainly have no capability to cater to such small markets as art photography and frankly they don't even care to try. "Bigger, better, faster and cheaper." The American Dream in one sentence. Yes ladies and germs, welcome to the 21st century where "all your images are belong to us" in glorious digital. A time when aging Baby Boomers with unrealistic expectations for their financial investments are now steering the boats of companies all over the globe and running nearly every one of them aground !! But that's OK because it's their money and they damn well better get their 16% ROI or someones butt is going to be in a sling !! In short, are you beginning to get the feeling that artistic photography (and therefore the photographers) don't matter one whit to these companies ? You don't. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email >>Unlike other recent film discontinuations, > > Such as APX25 ? Which was nearly as fine grained and sharp as > TP without the odd spectral sensitivity and processing mandates. For pictorial photography, yes. (I miss Panatomic-X.) TP was never a very good material for pictorial photography; it was super-fine-grained but very tricky to work with, since you had to abuse it (by a special kind of underdevelopment) to get normal pictorial contrast. My point was that Kodak was offering no substitute for TP for scientific work. It's (so far) been relatively uncommon for Kodak to discontinue a product without even *claiming* that there is a substitute. Sometimes not a very good substitute, of course. > As to "It's also probably the end of the hydrogen > hypersensitization era." I don't think a lot of astro-photographers [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > hypered film are now possible with off-the-shelf films right out of > the box." Actually I tend to agree. I have not used hypered film in about 10 years. Elite Chrome 100, for example, is virtually free of reciprocity failure. Though not as sharp as TP, it is sharp enough to do justice to the lenses we are likely to be using (at f/4 or wider). And you get color images, and good keeping properties, and easy processing (E-6). > Remember that there is still the theory that some new > technologies in film emulsion engineering are going to be introduced > and with significant advances in image quality and film speed. I know > the technology was developed but I doubt it will ever make it to the > factories. R&D investments have been slashed and manufacturers are > simply profiting from products that are "good enough". I think we got some of that, with almost no fanfare, with the "new" E100. (About a year ago E100 got a LOT finer-grained, and it wasn't advertised.) Kodak tells me E200 is slated for the same improvement soon (assuming they can afford it and don't lose interest!). Of course, the speed-grain ratio has been improving, and reciprocity failure has been DRAMATICALLY diminishing, for a long time. I don't know how much more black-and-white darkroom work is in my future. For me, "film" is, at present, E100 and Fuji Astia and a few of the close relatives of both. I do my terrestrial photography with a digital camera. SignatureClear skies, Michael A. Covington Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html > A sad day for black-and-white photography. > http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 > > Unlike other recent film discontinuations, this one has no substitute that > is anywhere close. That means there are things you can do with a camera > today that you will not be able to do with a camera next year. Why do you find Gigabitfilm is nowhere close? http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/menu.htm Erwin Puts measured Gigabitfilm 40 as having 90 lp/mm resolution, versus 85 lp/mm for Tech Pan 25 in Technidol. >> A sad day for black-and-white photography. >> http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/menu.htm I don't know about its suitability for scientific work. The data sheet does not include a spectral sensitivity curve. What I was getting at is that Kodak could not even tell us to use another Kodak product. >>> A sad day for black-and-white photography. >>> http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 >>> Unlike other recent film discontinuations, this one has no substitute >>> that >>> is anywhere close. That means there are things you can do with a camera >>> today that you will not be able to do with a camera next year. >> Why do you find Gigabitfilm is nowhere close? >> http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/menu.htm >I don't know about its suitability for scientific work. The data sheet does >not include a spectral sensitivity curve. Perhaps they would publish one if they knew people were interested. >What I was getting at is that Kodak could not even tell us to use another >Kodak product. In fairness, nothing else they make is really comparable to Technical Pan. It genuinely has no true substitute, only alternatives. > A sad day for black-and-white photography. > http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0409/index.html#040921 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur > www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html a great shame. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.