TMAX 3200

Messages
8,277
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
The Internet has confused me (not unusual).

Various sources (inc the Kodak datasheet) suggest this is an 800 film that can be pushed to 1600 or 3200. However it's DX coding is 3200 which suggests you should shoot it as a 3200 film.

Does anyone shoot it? If so - do you shoot at 3200 then get your lab to push it, or do you just send it off. Does your stuff come back exposed correctly?
As an aside, I did send a query to AG Photographic last week, but no reply :(
 
I don't know the answer unfortunately, but I'd recommend messaging NTphotoworks, they're pretty good at giving a decent reply
 
The Internet has confused me (not unusual).

Various sources (inc the Kodak datasheet) suggest this is an 800 film that can be pushed to 1600 or 3200. However it's DX coding is 3200 which suggests you should shoot it as a 3200 film.

Does anyone shoot it? If so - do you shoot at 3200 then get your lab to push it, or do you just send it off. Does your stuff come back exposed correctly?
As an aside, I did send a query to AG Photographic last week, but no reply :(

I think it's just as Kodak says: an ISO 800 film designed for pushing to 3200. As such, the recommended development—and effective box speed—is EI 3200. Ilford's Delta 3200 is similar, although I think it's technically ISO 1000 rather than 800.
 
I think it's just as Kodak says: an ISO 800 film designed for pushing to 3200. As such, the recommended development—and effective box speed—is EI 3200. Ilford's Delta 3200 is similar, although I think it's technically ISO 1000 rather than 800.

I have difficulty getting my head round this.

Why label a film at 3200 when it's actually 800 / 1000 speed ?

I understand how they are designed for pushing a couple of stops to 3200 but both TMax 400 and Delta 400 ( as examples) can be pushed 2 stops yet they aren't labelled as 1600 speed.

Perhaps it's a marketing gimmick, I dunno…...
 
So basically, if I want to shoot this at 3200 I need do nothing other than meter for 3200, shoot and send off for development.

If I want to shoot it at (for example) 800, that's fine, but I'll need to tell the developer that it's been pulled 2 stops. All the datasheet tells me is that I can pull to 800 and it will be fine.

Apologies if this sounds daft, but like Asha - I don't get why the speed on the box would ever be anything else.

(Thanks for those trying to help :))
 
So basically, if I want to shoot this at 3200 I need do nothing other than meter for 3200, shoot and send off for development.

If I want to shoot it at (for example) 800, that's fine, but I'll need to tell the developer that it's been pulled 2 stops. All the datasheet tells me is that I can pull to 800 and it will be fine.

Apologies if this sounds daft, but like Asha - I don't get why the speed on the box would ever be anything else.

(Thanks for those trying to help :))

It's designed for 3200, so you just shoot at 3200 and send it away for development.

You only need to tell the lab anything if you want the film developed at something other than 3200.
 
I don't know the answer to the film speed conundrum, but as a purely semi-educated guess, I'd point out that the ISO speed is determined according to the exposure needed to give a certain density above base and fog with a specific developer and a specific time, temperature and agitation regime in developing. Which is why, using a different developer, different agitation methods and (dare I suggest it) less well calibrated thermometers or controlled temperatures, people do come up with their own speed rating.

Now when you factor in that different developers react differently with different films (some combinations don't work very well together), and that some film makers may have developed (pun unintentional) chemicals that suit the profile of their film but which are obviously outside the ISO spec, it's not improbable that the ISO rating might actually not be the best rating to use.

Purely a speculative guess though.
 
I don't know the answer to the film speed conundrum, but as a purely semi-educated guess, I'd point out that the ISO speed is determined according to the exposure needed to give a certain density above base and fog with a specific developer and a specific time, temperature and agitation regime in developing. Which is why, using a different developer, different agitation methods and (dare I suggest it) less well calibrated thermometers or controlled temperatures, people do come up with their own speed rating.

Now when you factor in that different developers react differently with different films (some combinations don't work very well together), and that some film makers may have developed (pun unintentional) chemicals that suit the profile of their film but which are obviously outside the ISO spec, it's not improbable that the ISO rating might actually not be the best rating to use.

Purely a speculative guess though.
ISO is an international standard and the ISO figure assumes that the maker has adhered to all parts of the standard methodology. In this case, that would seem to give an ISO rating of 800. If the makers want you to use the film with an EI of 3200, they cannot legally call it ISO 3200 film but can call it a film with an EI of 3200. Actually, I do not know what Kodak actually refer to their speed rating as.

EDIT: I just checked on Kodak's web site and they refer to the film as a P3200 film, not an ISO 3200 film. They are veery clear not to refer to the ISO standard apart from saying that the film is ISO 800. All other references to film speed are EI.
 
Last edited:
Many (many) years ago I shot a lot of Kodak T-Max 3200 and shot it at 6,400 asa for grain effect, really nice. I remember the developing time was from memory 18.5 minutes but gave a lovely artistic etched feel to the overall photo.

I still have on display a 20x16 hand print framed showing in our hall of a landscape themed capture shot using T-Max 3200 pushed to 6,400 and so love it...!

Regards;
Peter
 
As far as I understand it, the P3200 means it is designed to be pushed to 3200, and as mentioned above, it's true speed is ISO800.

The development times stated by Kodak are for when it has been shot at 3200.

As pushing increases contrast, it is probably a very low contrast film at it's true speed. So you can shoot it at a slower speed, but it would be lower in contrast and would have less grain.

I have shot a couple of rolls and i'm still on the fence. My metering was a bit off (I was guestimating) so I want to shoot another roll with more careful metering.

I felt that it was very grainy when scanned with my Coolscan V, but I have not tried any prints as yet.
 
The development times stated by Kodak are for when it has been shot at 3200.

This now makes sense.

I've got a Christmas meal planned with friends, and was looking for a high speed film to take ambient light photos. I'm sure with my skills they'll be out of focus and badly composed so if all I'm worried about is the the grain I'll have done well.
 
I'm sure they will be great!!

The first roll I shot in my Electro 35, which is aperture priority with maximum iso setting of 1000. So I started shooting the roll at 1000, but then decided I needed more speed so set it to the fixed flash sync (1/30 from memory) and shot wide open - guestimating the exposure.

With the mixed exposure on same roll I decided to semi-stand in Rodinal, which got the roll developed but hardly optimal!!

Here is a link to a few from that roll, they were also a bit of an experiment in scanning methods but you get the idea....

Click below link to view my shared Lightroom album:
https://adobe.ly/2Fu3VmO

Second roll I shot at 1600 in my Rollei 35S, have only scanned a few so far. I'm pretty sure I dev'd these in some well used Microphen. My metering was a bit off indoors (under):

Click below link to view my shared Lightroom album:
https://adobe.ly/2qSrLhK

I need to finish scanning that roll really!! Annoyingly my shutter was sticking at 1/30, so I had quite a few wasted shots!!
 
It's designed for 3200, so you just shoot at 3200 and send it away for development.

You only need to tell the lab anything if you want the film developed at something other than 3200.

This is how we treat it.

But we do have customers who expose it at 1600, but have standard development.
 
Apologies for intruding - very interesting thread btw. I just thought I would ask the experts who have contributed so far if the same considerations above apply to the Ilford 3200 film.

I was hoping to try some this coming Christmas for some indoor portraits of my family, and was a bit confused by suggestions stating it should be exposed at 1250/1600 ISO and processed as normal (meaning I shouldn't tell the lab I exposed it at 1600). Is this the case?
 
Back
Top