Should I buy expired Kodak 3200?

Too bad I didn't read this thread before buying a boatload of this film at about $2 a roll! I'm running a test roll now, rated at 1600, so we'll see how it turns out. I"m not hopeful. I'll try to post a sample.
 
Sooner, it will probably be fine. I bought my "boatload" of TMX3200 last year with an expiration of 2007, and am still getting good results. I picked up a fresh roll a couple weeks ago, just to compare, and I honestly couldn't see any difference. YMMV.
 
Yup... another just pass on the "deal." I've used 3 y.o. expired TMZ and Delta 3200 and was not happy. Base fog was horrendous. I'd rather have the *option* of pumping up the grain (with Rodinal say) if I want it. 3 years is nothing to a 100 speed film in the cupboard, but 3200? No way.
 
Actually, I now have my first roll of this stuff hanging in the shower, and it turned out mostly okay. I took the advice here of shooting it at 1600 and then developed for only 13 minutes instead of the called for 16. Most shots are fine but a few are very dark; is that because the highlights needed more time in development? I will post pics tomorrow.
 
Well, the true speed of TMZ3200 is only 800. EI 1600 is a one-stop push, and 3200 is a two stop. I have shot this at all three speeds, and it's comes out great @ 800 and still pretty good @ 1600. And I only process for about 7.5 or 8 minutes respectively in Tmax Dev. Where did you get the 16 minutes from??? :eek:
 
I shot a couple of my 3/07 rolls of TMZ the other week at 800. They came out ok but still the base fog is pretty high. Definitely noticeable if you have a fresh roll hanging next to an old roll.
 
Marke, I developed in xtol and the big developer chart online said 16 minutes at the dilution I chose. I'll try it at iso 800 next time...I got a lot of the stuff to experiment with!
 
Finally, here is a picture from the TMX 3200 film I processed the other night. I think it turned out very well, frankly, at least in terms of the film (I'm not much of a photographer, style wise). These were shot at 1600 and developed in Xtol, albeit with shortened developing time.
 

Attachments

  • tmx3200_shot.jpg
    tmx3200_shot.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 0
The nice thing about TMZ is that if you print in a darkroom, the grain really isn't that noticeable at the 8x10 size. It's kind of funny when I read on other forums people bitching about the noise of the latest DSLR at ISO 6400 or something, and here I am using one of the grainiest B&W films available right now, pushed at that, and my prints are coming out nice and smooth. Not as smooth as Pan F+ obviously, but they look good.
 
Tim, I agree about those smooth 8x10s. My scans are always considerably grainier than the actual prints. Have you printed 11x14?

Also, I haven't noticed the fog in the '07 film I've shot, even alongside the fresh film. Who knows, maybe the fresh roll wasn't that fresh. Will have to try again.
 
No I've never actually printed 11x14. However, I've got some recent shots on TMZ that I want to print, and I have a pack of 11x14 paper waiting for me for the next time I go into the darkroom. Got a Peak grain focuser too now (for a ridiculously low price), so we'll see how sharp we can get the grain :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom