Kodak Tmax P3200 vs Ilford Delta 3200
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 มี.ค. 2018
- Thanks for watching and hope you enjoyed!!
Please feel free to discuss your results with these two films in the comments section below. I would love to hear how Tmax P3200 turned out with other developers.
Also, I'll be editing and posting some of the photos from the video to me Instagram account so feel free to follow me @jesshobbsphoto
Studio Argentique:
www.studioargentique.net/
/ studioargentique
Like for using two exact cameras with two exact lenses for comparison, using same exposures, done at the same time. That's so rare to see these days. Call me a tech control freak, but that's the only fair way to compare films. Well done...
I felt that using the same camera/lens combo was the only was to do a true comparison. The funny thing is that just before I filmed this video I had to have one of the cameras CLAd and the light meter was off by a whole stop... so I metered with the one that I knew and trusted, and I think the results speak for themselves. If you liked this one, you'll probably like my next video when I do the same thing with three of the same camera! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Subbed
The only fault with this system is if the shutters are not calibrated and the aperture in the lens aren’t exactly the same. However compared to other channels this is the best unscientific method. Interesting to see that Delta seems a bit more sensitive, less contrasts, more shadow detail whilst Kodak is punchier. If you want prints then Kodak would be better out of the tin whilst ILFORD would be suitable for scanning.
I wonder tho. about developing each film in it's own recommended developer rather than the same kodak recommnded xtol. I realize the consistency is important but not necessarily a fair comparison where film is involved unless developing ilford film in ilford recommended developers either ilfotec ddx or microphen? Just a thought.
I agree, different developers (especially ones formulated for specific films) will definitely yield different results. I was, however, limited in my choice of developers, as the local lab that I brought the rolls to only had X-TOL left in stock (and even they were really disappointed at that!). I am really looking forward to shooting more of both of these films and experimenting with developers in the future! Thanks for your comments!
There are wayyy too many dudes making film photography videos, glad to see some females contributing content. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate them! I agree that there seems to be a lack of female film photographers creating content for a YT audience, hopefully more will be inspired to contribute in the future because it is another fun platform in which we can showcase our work. Thanks for watching and commenting, I promise to be back with another video in the near future!
Nice try soy boy, but you still aren't getting laid.
@@abigailsockeye1586 Jesus dude, is it really so bad to appreciate representation in a hobby you enjoy?
Are you being a feminist to film photographers?
@@abigailsockeye1586 Abigail, if you’re real, I love you.
Your movies are a breath of fresh air...and no hipster wobbly crackly loop based jazz 👍😊
I like Contrast. And I purchased a few rolls of TMX3200. However it’s worth mentioning that Ilford was always loyal to film shooters, So it deserves our loyalty and not hurting its business whenever Kodak /Fuji decides to have a film removed or reintroduced on a whim (Acros, anyone?)
I absolutely agree, and I usually lean more towards shooting Ilford rather than Kodak (controversy: I prefer HP5 to Tri-X 400!). I do really like the new P3200, but I also like how much more shadow detail the Delta 3200 retains, which will be interesting to play around with in the darkroom or even through Lightroom. I'll be stocking my fridge with both emulsions for sure! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Where I live the Ilfords are more expensive, actually the Acros was the cheapest. I can’t find ilford developers. So I agree with your assessment partially because even though I love ilford films, availability/cost is sometimes an issue
I support Ilford.
Got the impression the Delta was asking for more exposure at each setting. Loved the contrast on the Tmax. Thanks for sharing! Well done, more vids please :)
Excellent first video, great work.
Straight from camera P3200 seems to look best while the Delta 3200 would really benefit from some post processing. Straight from camera the contrast in the P3200 is great while the Delta shows more shadow details it looks more hazy.
Look forward to more videos.
Great to see someone shooting the Olympus OM-1, The contrast of P3200 is beautiful!
The OM-1 is one of my all-time favourite cameras, so lightweight and fun to shoot with. I agree that the contrast on the P3200 came out beautifully, I love being able to shoot a film and getting those results right out of the box... I haven't completely edged out the Delta 3200 though, I'm intrigued to see what I can do with that film in the darkroom! Thanks for watching and commenting!
I don't feel like I could pick a favorite. P3200 looks a bit more contrasty but has less shadow details. While Delta 3200 is a bit flatter in contrast but has more detail in the shadows. For me it would probably be dependent on subject matter as to which one I would choose.
I agree! My initial reaction was that I liked how much more contrast the P3200 had... but then I started noticing how much more detail in both the shadows and the highlights that Delta 3200 retains. I think each film has its benefits and it's a matter of knowing when to use each one, depending on your desired results. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I think ilford is technically better because of this. I can add contrast when printing but I can't just add detail.
Definitely more contrast in the P3200, but I saw something different in the shadow detail in some of the highest contrast shots. For example, @9:28 the highlights are blown out on the P3200 (e.g. the sign above the store), but you can still see details in the shadows (e.g. the upstairs windows, and the car on the right). In the Ilford, however, the highlights in the sign are preserved, but the details in the shadows are washed out. Also look @10:10 and see the side-by-side difference in shadow detail.
My observations are more in line with Barry’s. What I’m seeing in the shadows isn’t what many others seem to be describing here. However, in the subway there were shots where the Delta had more shadow detail, but it also appeared to yield a higher exposure across the board (escalator shots in particular). Looking down at tracks at 5:09, Delta holds highlights a tiny bit better while also being brighter in shadows and appearing to have more detail there too. Could it largely be a spectral response issue? The Delta is significantly more sensitive to the fluorescent light in that environment or something? This reverses in sunlight, with the Kodak exposing the statue brighter. The sculpted red columns at 7:08, they’re lit by sunlight on one side and fluorescent on the other. The Delta is exposing both the outdoor background and the sunlit-side highlights darker and with more detail, but it renders a much brighter exposure on the fluorescent-lit side of the columns. It looks like more than a contrast difference alone. Looking up response graphs for both, the difference isn’t pronounced, but it does kinda look like TMax starts to fall off around where fluorescent lights peak, while the Delta maintains more of a plateau in that range.
Given the idea that these films aren’t delivering the same effective sensitivity and exposure in these different types of light, the general impression I’m getting in these comparisons is that the Delta is good at delivering detailed and somewhat flat results when given plenty of exposure, but its shadows can fall apart in low light when exposed insufficiently for whatever reason. The TMax seems to do a remarkably good job of consistently delivering contrasty results that retain good detail across a variety of exposures and lighting types, and it appears that it often only retains less shadow detail when it’s effectively being given less exposure to work with (as in the escalators). I could be wrong, but that’s what I take from this.
The turnstyles at 5:17 is one of the shots that really makes the Delta look more refined and detailed. However, in the P3200 I can see just about as many bricks fading into shadows on the left wall, and the background shape on the wall near the center appears to have details in the Kodak shot that aren’t in the Ilford. If you watch some of the other subway shots, you can sometimes see that, going from Kodak to Ilford, the shadowed walls go from dark with texture detail to brighter but smoothed over. The shot at 10:10 is detailed throughout in the Kodak, but obliterated in the Ilford. In the shots at 10:33, look at the bricks in the deep shadows on the Kodak, then watch how those bricks simply disappear when it switches to the Ilford. The same thing happens consistently in the night shots. I think the commenters picking the Delta for its greater editability are perhaps being fooled into a false perception of shadow detail by the difference in contrast and blackpoint. The Kodak *looks* like it *should* have less shadow detail, but when you compare the same spots back to back the TMax often held shadow details that were absent in the Delta shot. So despite the talk about better shadow detail in the Delta, that generalization doesn’t seem to hold up consistently. If someone prefers the results from the Ilford, that’s totally valid, especially if their reason is that the more low-fi looking result in some of the night shots is the final look they’re going for. If the reason is that it’s recording more shadow detail, which is the reason most are going with, I think that’s valid for some of these shots but not for others, and overall I don’t think that’s actually the result we’re seeing in this comparison.
Differences in detail recording aside, it seems there’s a difference of philosophies in the comments: some like that the P3200 delivers a more finished looking image much of the time, while others perceive the Delta as being more editable, like a flat raw file they can edit with more flexibility. But how many of us go to the expense and trouble of shooting film with the goal of getting the most flexibile scan that requires the same heavy shaping as our digital images? I think a lot of us shoot film to escape exactly that, and to achieve a particular look from a film. I’m not sure I see the sense in shooting a film that doesn’t deliver a look very close to what you want in the finished product, without major changes to its character in digital post. Those looking for a good B&W film to digitally edit in a flexible variety of directions, toward an end result that looks completely different from the negative, would likely be better served by just shooting raw and applying a high quality emulation. A full color starting point is, after all, a much more flexible foundation for a digital B&W edit. Film is a lot of unnecessary trouble to add to that process, just to get a digitally crafted end result that can’t take advantage of all the standard digital conversion tools, such as color channel mixture. It’s very compromised. You can shoot a film you like the look of, or shoot digital and craft whatever sort of look you want with some effort, or you can shoot a BW film that doesn’t look like what you’re going for and get the worst of both worlds. :D
This was the video I was hoping someone would make - and you pulled it off brilliantly. Stellar first video! Subbed.
Thank you so much for the kind words, I really appreciate them! I'm definitely looking forward to providing more content, and the overwhelming response to this video has me chomping at the bit to get back out there! Thanks for watching and subscribing!
I prefer the delta 3200 for most shots, could always add in contrast, cant take it away, plus they make delta 3200 in 120 which i what i shoot, so a no brainer really if you want to eventually move up.
I'm actually quite surprised at how much I like the P3200, I wasn't expecting that! I do love how much more detail the Delta 3200 retained, it'll be fun to see how the two films measure up in post-processing/darkroom. I shoot a lot of 120 as well (I will eventually get into that in future videos), although I tend to use slow speed films... I'll pick up a roll of Delta 3200 and try it out sometime! Thanks for watching and commenting!
So excellent! This is such a amazing video comparison. Done in perfect style. Thank you.
First video and you're already off to a great start. Cheers!
I'll admit that the positive response has surpassed my expectations by a long shot, and I am definitely looking forward to producing more content! Thanks for watching and commenting!
This is such a fantastic and dynamic comparison! Thanks :)
This is exactly what I've been looking for! Every time I ask what the difference is, people reel of technical data and developing times - all I wanted to know was how the looks compared, and this answers it perfectly!
Thank you for the video! I watched all with pleasure. Hats off to a girl with an old film camera. Thank you for being.
what a great comparison video!
thanks for sharing your insights on these two films with us!
really enjoyed watching this!
This is a really fun video! Excited to see more that you make!
Thanks for watching! I promise to be back soon!
Awesome video across the board. Very informative and helpful as well as nicely presented, shot and edited. Including the audio design. Great job!
Great first video! Can’t wait to see your next one.
Great vid, exactly what I was looking for! You should 100% keep doing TH-cam! Thanks a lot.
Thank you so much for the kind words, I really appreciate them! I promise to be back soon with a new video! Thanks for watching!
I love seeing a fresh film channel pop up. You made a great vid and I can't wait to see what else you'll do! Good on ya. (I liked the kodak a lot more btw)
Very nice video... loved the photos, and the cool places...
Very very interesting comparison. Enjoyable photographs too. Thank you for your work and skills. RS. Ontario
love the comparison!! cant wait to try them out side by side myself!!!
It was a lot of fun to shoot both films, and now I have more ideas for experimentation, both in the shooting and development processes! Thanks for watching and commenting!
By the way, thanks for being my first "celebrity comment"! Let me know if you're ever in Montreal, I'll take you out for some poutine!
Great video Jess! I especially like that you not only shot with identical cameras, but indoors as well as out, nice comparison.
Thank you! Please more of this. I like the Kodak Tmax P3200...just ordered some rolls.
Very helpful video Jess. I’m a Ilford guy BUT based on this video I’m definitely going to pick up some TMax 3200! Thanks! I look forward to seeing your next one with HP5 vs TriX & Street Pan!!
I have always been a fan of Ilford myself, but I think my film stock will always include a roll or two of P3200 now! Thanks for watching and commenting!
I wish you good luck with your channel ! Awesome pictures BTW!
Well done and keep up with the good work! Thanks for the contents!
I'm the type that I like to add contrast to my shots in post production. I shot and developed P3200 which i rated at 1600 this week and I was impressed by two things: 1. Amazing shadow details as well as ability to recover them in post 2. I barely did any post production on the roll, the contrast was spot on to my taste, not too strong like TriX, not too grey like HP5. I planning on doing a video comparison against HP5, Tri-X and Tmax400 all rated at 1600. Great video by the way, nice personality and energy. Keep it up. Subscribed!
I am way late for this party, but a very nicely done video, and thanks for the reminder of how fabulous Montreal is.
Great video can see all of the work you put into it keep it up!
Great video loved the accompanying music as well. I definitely liked how punchy P3200 turned out Delta looked a bit flat. Your results made me excited to see my own results. Keep the videos coming.
Great video!!! Love the comparison
Great video! I can't wait to see what else you upload :)
Thanks for watching! I promise to be back soon with a new video!
Great video!! The contrast of the P3200 is unmatched. That's definitely the one for me. Thanks for the comparison.
Very nice method.
Also liked the way the the episode was shot.
Really good, well thought through video and a sound comparison made between the films
Having watched quite a few of your video's Jess, I decided to start again from the beginning as I only found you in 2019 and I have some catching up to do. Wow! talk about getting it right first time!
This is your first Video? I don’t believe it, fantastic job! Subscribed.
Very good job! Good comparison side by side. Same camera , same lens and same shoot. I like the contrast of kodak.thank you
Nice first video, Jess. Looking forward to seeing more of your work.
Thanks for the kind words! I promise to be back soon with a new video!
Really great video, I forget how beautiful the Montreal Metro is
Very enjoyable and informative video!
Hey I'm from Montreal too! Glad to see this video ! Great content
Awesome, high fives for Montreal! Thanks for watching, and maybe we'll see each other on the streets one day!
Great video!!! Love the comparison. I’m a sucker for contrast, so I’m going with p3200
The P3200 is so punchy, I was really impressed with the results. I'm also a fan of contrast, so I think I'm giving the slight edge to Kodak on this one, but I'm excited to see what the Delta 3200 can do in Lightroom or in the darkroom. Thanks for watching and commenting!
Love the colour of that coat in the sunshine ✅👍
Love the contrast of the Kodak film. Nice work - informative video. Good luck.
Very well done !
Great job all of you guys...
Thanks for watching!
I loved watching this videoo!
I have been shooting the Tmax 400 more than Ilford lately, because I love the contrast. But I love shooting Ilford3200 at 1600, but processing at box speed. It gets amaaaazing grain and contrast.
great film comparison and great first video! look forward to what is coming on your channel!
Thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate them! I promise to be back soon with a new video! Thanks for watching!
Awesome video especially for your first!
Thanks for the comparison. Great video.
Thanks so much, I appreciate that! Thanks for watching!
I was just in Montreal...but without my film camera. What a great city to take photos in, and I didn't come prepared.
For most shots I preferred the contrast of the Kodak, but Ilford’s dynamic range was nice in a few shots. Great video. Loved the camera choice as well.
Awesome comparison. You did it properly as well! Same camera, same lens and same settings. I look forward to whats next.
BTW...under these circumstances i preferred the Kodak.
Wow an amazing video! And from a fellow Canadian photographer 😊 loved how you used the equivalent camera and lens side by side for the most accurate comparison. Defiantly preferred the Kodak film as it has more contrast and even seemed brighter at times (might just be from the deltas muddier and greyed rendering of the scene) berry interesting results as I am a fan of delta 100 for daytime street, have yet to try delta 400. Can’t wait to see more videos from you!
Great content from my #1 female TH-cam photographer. It's so hard to choose between the two, but I do like the richness of Kodak inside the station.
Great video! I can actually see your love and passion for film photography. Very inspiring for beginners (like me). Already suscribed, greetings from Perú!
Great video, subscribed!
Wonderful video! I understand the effort you made in producing a video shooting out and about, having produced one myself, and think you made an excellent job of it! Keeep it up.
Thanks so much for your kind words, I really appreciate it! I'll be back soon with another video! Thanks for watching!
Great video, got me subscribed! Would love to see more film reviews! :)
I promise to get more videos up soon! I wasn't quite prepared for the overwhelming response to this one, so I don't have anything ready yet, but I can guarantee there will be more content! Thanks for watching and subscribing!
Great video! Definitely a new subscriber here, good luck with this channel!
This is amazing. Keep doing!
Thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate them! I promise to be back soon with a new video! Thanks for watching!
I really enjoyed this video! It was very helpfull! Did you put your shutter speed one step up to compensate for the ISO1600 setting on the camera?
I did my photography college course few years ago and when I took photos of any subjects I always use a RED or a ORANGE filter to get the BEST contrast from the BLACK AND WHITE films
Ha ha, I was taught to use a yellow filter as a minimum! I didn't for this video to just show the bare bones of the films, but yes, using filters is a big bonus for b&w photography! I also choose a filter according to the lens I choose to use, some have better coatings than others, so they also add nice contrast.
Thanks for watching!
Your first video. WOW! Keep up the great work ;)
Thanks so much! I am actually overwhelmed with the positive response to this video, I had no idea it would catch on like it has, but I can't wait to film more videos for everyone! Thanks for watching and commenting!
super cool. i just got some ilford delta 3200 for the first time
Great video! I will go with Kodak P3200.
Kodak is winner imo.. that contrast on first photo got me.. 🤯🤯 thank you😊
Kodak is definitely the winner straight out of the box! But I think Ilford has a few tricks up it's sleeve, I personally find the negatives are more workable either in Lightroom, or printing in a darkroom. I live that both films are somewhat similar, but each have their own characteristics!
Thanks for watching!
336 subscribers and 214 likes for your first video so soon after it being released, speaks volumes. Great comparison, very well balanced, to me the TMax had better contrast but the Delta 3200 opened the shadows more. My days of going out after dark are a distant memory so neither are a film I will keep in stock, but it’s great to know there is a choice out there. Fantastic first video, very well done indeed and a great introduction.
Thank you so much for the kind words, they mean a lot to me! The response has been incredible, completely surpassed my hopes/expectations! I really enjoyed comparing these two films, it was fun to see how each held their own under different situations. I have yet to try them out during daytime or portrait shoots, so there will be a lot of experimentation in my future! Glad you liked the video, I promise there will be more where that came from! Thanks for watching and commenting!
It's just because the Delta black level wasn't the same as the P3200, not necessarily more contrast. Having said that, it's hard to tell but I do think the P3200 has slightly higher dynamic range.
To my eye, it was as though each film had a split personality. In the lowest light, the Ilford opened the shadows far better, as geowal91 says, but its weak blacks relative to the Kodak made it appear to have a veiling haze in the better lit scenes. One almost needs two cameras to be ready for both levels of lighting, unless willing to overexpose the Kodak in dark scenes (and then what's the point?).
eric moss Very well put. The only part of the comparison that wasn’t equal was that both films used a Kodak developer, something they had no control over in the video. I don’t shoot very fast film at all, and can’t say I have any experience, but one wonders how the Delta would have fared in DD-X.
Nice video. I can’t decide which I like more. For sure the increased contrast in the p3200 means less work for me in Lightroom. I recently shot p3200 during Halloween. It worked really well where there was some natural light available and with flash. But I had trouble with recovering shadow details. I particularly love the grain structure in the emulsion. I can also reflect about the process of scanning. I develop and scan myself and found that the film is easy to lay flat on the flatbed scanner. I think I will probably buy p3200 since it’s currently going cheaper than the ilford delta 3200 but I think both are excellent and have unique characteristics.
It’s a difficult choice. I love Ilford 3200 (i use it all the time) but I did feel that that the P3200 worked/looked better in some situations. Great video can’t wait for the next one!
Awesome Jess!
Thanks for watching! It was a lot of fun filming this video!
Great video, an absolutely fair test between the two films. I prefer the contrast of the P3200 which made the otherwise excellent Delta look just a little opaque. Keep up the good work and I have subscribed!
Amazing video, and amazingly thorough, it would have been nice to hear your thoughts on wrap up, even if it had to wait for a second shot after you got them back. But the work also speaks for itself!
I feel like the Delta3200's lower contrast kind of uniquely suits it to really dicey indoor situations where you're already trying to get as much light as you can. While P3200's punchyness seems great for when you're out shooting and get to 'pick and choose' your shots and metering a bit more to draw it out.
looking forward to diving into this channel, I have no idea how you only have 6K subs!
Great to watch, loved the style, please keep up the great work! As for choice P3200 v Delta3200, I'll need to make my own comparison. Probably fairer to use DDX with Delta3200 and use my own scanner and adjustments. Both Kodak and Ilford deserve all the support we can all give. Can't wait to watch the next video..
Best way to drive the film contrast is by development time
Great video! I preferred the Kodak photos.
Jess Hobbs First of all, kudos for a nice video. I guess I am a veteran in b/w, having used a fair bit of HP4, KB14 and such back then.
Scanning negatives might not give the best indication of the film performance, personally I would examine the negatives on a light box and then make conventional prints. For films meant for XL work such as Tri-X and HP5, the aim is to increase contrast at the toe at the H&D curve while maintaining a low overall contrast, so that when pushed, there are more shadow details to be brought out without frying the highlights. In other words, it'd be faster in the camera, and faster in the tank.
My own tests with the TMZ (P3200) is that its true speed is 1000/31˚ but with extra contrast at the toe; so it gives great shadow details at its true speed, much better than TX pushed to the same EI; I am still convinced that the 3200/36˚ rating is the most it can be pushed as both highlights and shadows are already starting to get obviously blocked: the pictures might look eye-catching for having "good contrast" but the loss at both ends would be hard to recover, especially when printed conventionally where they are further compressed by the paper's H&D shoulder and toe.
Delta 3200 is a bit more conventional and I have not tried to establish its real speed, the higher B&F can be "printed through" but it still alters the response a little. That said, it still preserves separations at both highlight and shadow areas while keeping the overall contrast low enough, coupled with the high B&F, scanned pictures - especially if previously calibrated for something like TMZ - would certainly look "muddy" but there are huge amounts of details that can be easily brought out; it is even quite obvious in your comparison pictures.
The real test would be to make conventional prints with an enlarger after calibrating the respective negatives, that would be a lot more telling.
Definitely loved the contrast from the tmax p3200. That’s the amount I love in my black and white film!
Yeah, it's definitely a special film! I can't wait to go out and shoot more! Thanks for watching and commenting!
This one is better than the three films comparisons in terms of photos you had .. i was still thinking ohh bit wider shots pls pls 😆 pretty pretty awesome ones ..p3200 is a lit..
Great video!!!
Hard to tell the difference . Both films are very good. Like the video. Watching in Terrassa, Spain. Subscribed already.
I found you on the episode where you got your Intrepid...I'm just going back to see where you've been.... to me, you hit the ground running with this episode...it's really good to see a nice film comparison. To me, there is no comparison...the P3200 is a clear winner.
Thank you for the comparison. The Kodak TMAX 3200 sparked!!
But I still would give the Ilford 3200 a try. More power to you!!
I'm a Canadian photographer recently getting back into film. Thanks for this comparison video and warm regards from Tokyo! I'm going to pick me up some P3200. Subscribed. PS: I like your red coat!...:)
Thanks for watching, I'm happy you liked it! Have fun shooting film out in Tokyo, and let me know what you think of P3200! P.S. It's my favourite coat! :)
Great video, thanks a lot.
Wow cool vid. Kodak is the definite winner for me as I’m a big contrast fan.
I am your new subscriber from a photographer who has been shooting film for fifteen plus years. I am glad to see more young folks like you young lady in keeping film alive. Hopefully, they would be building new film cameras despite the popularity of digital photography. I do shoot digital as well. Both the Delta and the Kodak has its plus and minuses. I do like the Kodak in most of the shots for its contrast and in some situations, it can be a little too dark that the Ilford Delta looks better. In most parts, the Delta is a bit bright in contrast but sometimes it helps in very dark places in some of the shots such as the moving escalator. If you need a camera to shoot at ISO 3200 than I would suggest to get either the Nikon F100 or the Nikon F5. I do own these cameras and after watching this video, I decided to check the ISO maximum setting. I found that the maximum ISO setting on both of these cameras are ISO 6400. Nikon manual and autofocus lenses do work well with these cameras. For a 50mm autofocus, a Nikon 50mm F1.8 D lens is a good lens. For a 50mm Nikon AIS manual focus, a Nikon 50mm F1.4 AIS lens works very well and gives very good contrast. Peace, Flood!
This is such a good comparison, very rare to see the same camera with the same lens for the comparison. I have never tried those two films but I have a Ilford 3200 waiting to get its turn in my Pentax but from your results I prefer the Kodak 3200, more contrasty
Keep it up good work!
This reaffirms my bias for Kodak film. For the most part, I liked the Kodak over the Ilford. That's just my preference and opinion. I really liked all the different examples you used. This is really helpful since it gives me a rough idea as to what I need to set my camera for in different lighting conditions when using this film. Great video!
The shadow detail on ilford is pretty nice! However, I like the more contrasty look that p3200 delivers just a bit more. Nice video!
Really enjoyed it.
Thank you very much!!
Kodak! Keep up the good work!
I agree. I like the contrast of the Kodak film, But in many ways I like both. I think I’ll use them indistinctly if needed, I’m not ready to deny any of them now.
an actual comparison. the dedication of carrying 2 cameras is appreciated!
I'd personally shoot delta over tmax. I prefer adding contrast to my liking when scanning, I feel that tmax is sometimes abit to contrasty.
good luck shooting the next video!
I've always been more of an Ilford girl myself, so I was actually surprised to like P3200 as much as I did. I'm definitely looking forward to shooting both of these films more in the future! Thanks for watching and commenting!
P3200. Love the video and content. I love Tri-x.