Ilford Fp4 Vs T Max 100

[fernandez_diez]

Hello I always used to use FP4 BW film but now I would like to buy a pack of several films T max 100 BW.
Please, I never used this film and I would like to know if the grain may be bigger or smaller than FP4 grain.
I came back to the lovely BW film after five years stopped apart using positive film. Now I,m a little bit lost. I need a few time to put my work method in order.
I use to develop with D 76.
Regards, and sorry my bad english

 

[patrickhh]

TMax is comparable to Ilford Delta and should be a bit finer grained than FP4+

 

[Roger Hicks]

TMY is significantly finer grained and sharper (Delta 100 is sharper again).

FP4 has much superior tonality (in my book) and has a far wider developer repertoire as well as being more tolerant of over/under exposure and over/under development.

No need to apologize for your English. There are native speakers who do not write as clearly as you do!

Cheers,

R.

 

[Turtle]

Tmax 100 has finer grain, less exposure and development tolerance and a very modern look to it. In general I find it makes a poor all round film with a tendency to make everything look flat and lifeless. It works well with certain scenes (depends on tnalrange/brightness etc) but in general I stay well clear of it. I have made some lovely images from it but all to many have an inexplicable lifelessness. Fp4+ is a great all rounder, but if you want finer grain, I would recommend Delta 100 and if you want it finer still, try Acros 100. All in my view produce more pleasing images. If you would like to improve the fineness of the grain a touch, try Xtol in place of D76 as it produces slightly finer grain.

So basically what Roger says, although I would say that Tmax100 can produce images that look less sharp than Fp4+ if the enlargement factor is small, because there is no grain to provide bite to the image.

 

[fernandez_diez]

I shoot several photographs to my little daughter. Scanning BW negative and looking at the PC screen, with photoshop, I didn,t mind the cool tone. After I sent to a laboratory for print 20x30 cm (perhaph 40x 50 inch) and I could appreciate a warm tone.
May be it due to the film or it is a issue about the print method.?

To Roger: Thanks you very much. You are very Kind. Sometimes I,m affraid that people amuse of my sentences.

 

[David Goldfarb]

TMX has very fine grain, very high resolution, and excellent reciprocity characteristics for long exposures. The spectral sensitivity, however, is so linear it looks a lot like B&W video, so I don't particularly use it that often, though it was my main film for many years.

FP4+ has high acutance, which can make it look sharper than TMX though the resolution isn't actually as high, and it has a more traditional characteristic curve and spectral sensitivity curve, so it has more of a classic B&W film look, which I like.

Delta 100 I find to be a little bottom-heavy, so I prefer TMX to Delta 100, though I prefer Delta 400 to TMY.

Get some film and run some tests and see what suits your own tastes.

 

[lZr]

Already to much said about TMAX 100. In my exprerience, I like it developed in TMAX developer.

 

[charjohncarter]

I have only used TMX, so this is one sided, but I have to agree with Roger. TMX is just plain difficult, my other 100 range film is PlusX. I'm not recommending it but it sure is a lot easier to use than TMX. When you send your digital image file to the lab, be sure they have all their auto-adjustments turned off. Then it will look more like your computer screen.

 

[Rob-F]

I agree, right down the line, with Roger and with Turtle! Once in a while I got a good shot with TMX100, but "flat and lifeless" and "a poor all-around film" describe TMX100 perfectly. I tried it in several developers, including TMax, D76, HC-110, Microdol. I usually got a lackluster contrast, and when I tried to perk it up with increased development I got blocked highlights. Phooey. FP-4, Delta 100, or Plus-X--those are my choices.

 

[rich815]

Quite a different look to FP-4 for the most part, and as one of the main attributes of using B&W films and developing yourself, can vary quite a bit in grain look and tonal character depending on how you expose and develop it. You really should just try a few rolls in the conditions you like to see what you think. I love both older emulsions (FP-4, Plus-X, Fuji 100SS....) and the newer ones (Delta 100, Tmax 100, Fuji Acros...) but use them for different subjects and looks. But even then I did not really like Tmax 100 so much until I tried it in DD-X...and more recently in Rodinal. In D-76 (which I love for Delta 100 and Acros) I just found the Tmax 100 tonality to not completely be to my liking. But that's me.

For some comparison and sense of the different qualities from these two films, at least what I've gotten from them, see here:

Tmax 100:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=38698047@N00&q=Tmax100&m=tags

FP-4:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=38698047@N00&q=FP-4&m=tags

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I would recommend to try it... and if you like the results, be happy. In my experience, T-Max is a pain to fix. I do like the results, but hate that even with the Ilford Rapid Fixer, the edges of my negatives still have the whitish residue of unfixed film.

Should I add that this never happens with FP4?

 

[charjohncarter]

Rich, that is a nice comparison. Thanks!

 

[wallace]

Since Tri-X and Plus-X work wonderful in D76 1:1 I would go for Kodak.
Plus-X has even better tonality than FP4. I changed to Rodinal, which gives more grain but good sharpness and tonality and is worry free concerning storage. Plus -X in Rodinal 1:50 :

http://www.flickr.com/photos/47154683@N00/2151797237/

Wallace

 

[rich815]

....I do like the results, but hate that even with the Ilford Rapid Fixer, the edges of my negatives still have the whitish residue of unfixed film.

Should I add that this never happens with FP4?

You might see if you can find a source for alkaline fixers, such as TF-4. I have no problems like you describe for any of my films. The alkaline fixers also are MUCH easier and faster to wash out of films. Photographer's Formulary carries it. ( http://tinyurl.com/2anyhk )

 

[rich815]

Plus-X has even better tonality than FP4.

Define "better" please....

Darn, and here I was thinking FP-4 was pretty good. If I'd only known.....😀

 

[wallace]

Define "better" please....

Darn, and here I was thinking FP-4 was pretty good. If I'd only known.....😀

Plus-X, like APX 100, is a more classical emulsion than FP4. It gives less contrast but a wider range of grey tones.