Question about Tmax 400

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Jimi and Jim and Janis, Oct 13, 2009.

  1. Jimi and Jim and Janis

    Jimi and Jim and Janis Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Location:
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Kodak says that Tmax 400 can be pushed one stop without addtional developing time. So I can shoot half the roll in 400 and the rest in 800 iso and it gets developed fine? no? Thanks for reading
     
  2. Ektagraphic

    Ektagraphic Member

    Messages:
    2,914
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Location:
    Southeastern
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I haven't done it personally (yet) but I believe I have heard the same. Push processing (especially if processing yourself) is not hard.
     
  3. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    20,239
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    you will be able to see that your asa800 exposures
    will look a little "thinner" than the asa400 exposures
    but you should be ok ..

    have fun !
    john
     
  4. Jimi and Jim and Janis

    Jimi and Jim and Janis Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Location:
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thank you both very much!
     
  5. fschifano

    fschifano Member

    Messages:
    3,216
    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Location:
    Valley Strea
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You lose some shadow detail if you underexpose the film by one stop, which is what you're doing if you shoot it at EI 800. The contrast between the middle values is still pretty good though because the film has a short toe and a relatively long straight line middle section to the characteristic curve.
     
  6. Christopher Walrath

    Christopher Walrath Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,129
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Location:
    Two inches to the left
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wirelessly posted (BBBold: BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.297 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    Honestly, if you underexpose by one stop, it's no big whoop to add an extra 36" (HC110 DilB) to your dev time.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 13, 2009
  7. 2F/2F

    2F/2F Member

    Messages:
    8,003
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi,

    First, pushing is altering development to increase contrast. How you rate your film does not determine whether or not you are pushing. This only determines how you are exposing. Pushing refers to a development technique, not to a film rating. You cannot technically push without, er....pushing!

    So, what Kodak is saying is simply that the film can easily survive one stop of underexposure without being pushed.

    FWIW, most black and white films can do this as well. T-Max simply handles it a little better due to its inherently near-linear response to light. For my personal shooting, I think of T-Max as having a lot of the same uses as digital: Low contrast and/or low light scenes, where underexposure (often extreme underexposure) is unavoidable. This is where digital and T-Max really work best for what I shoot. (Of course, T-Max is more flexible and has more latitude, as does negative film in general, IMO.)

    Your roll should be fine. I would not push it. It is more likely that you will make the shots at 400 harder to print by pushing than it would be to print the underexposed shots at 800, even with normal development. This is because it is generally easier and more "natural" looking to add contrast to a print using simple printing methods (such as contrast filters) than it is to lower contrast with the same methods.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 13, 2009