Some Kodak T-MAX100 - 120 help

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by /dev/null, Nov 3, 2011.

  1. /dev/null

    /dev/null Member

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    The Netherla
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm an analog newbie and the weekend I am going to shoot some landscapes, trees and stuff with the T-MAX100. Probably a bit of cloudy weather. I am looking for contrast rich results and did some reading on development, so probably will do it in Rodinal.

    Any thoughts on the preffered ISO setting for this film? Like they say the Ilford 3200 goes on 1600 for instance. I just measure ISO100? Thanks.
     
  2. Mackinaw

    Mackinaw Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Location:
    One hour sou
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you're new to film and processing, I'd experiment some first. Exposing Tmax-100 at an E.I. of 100 is a good starting point. As for developers, Rodinal is OK too. If you want to impact contrast, you can do that in the development process by extending the development time 10% - 20%. Shoot a roll and see what happens.

    Jim B.
     
  3. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,510
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you haven't used a combo, any combo, the best place to start IMO is with the box rating and normal development. You can adjust contrast when you print.

    Printing is the real test, adjusting the negative's contrast really only makes sense when you are trying to make your printing easier.

    One of the big mistakes I made when coming back to film was trying to make pretty "contrasty" negatives, because I wasn't printing yet and I wanted something to look good. :D

    Yes, those early B&W negatives are "prettier" to look at directly but they are really much tougher to print. In contrast to that my early C-41 negatives, which were developed "by the book" are quite easy to print. My current B&W negs which are now generally shot and developed pretty much "by the book" print much, much easier.
     
  4. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    To start, get yourself some D76. Rate the film at 100 and develop it in D76 diluted 1:1 with water as per Kodak's time/temperature/agitation recommendations. Start there. Ideally you'd do a few test rolls for practice and to fine tune things.

    Evaluate your negatives by printing them, not by visual inspection of the negatives. It is difficult to evaluate a negative by visual inspection, particularly if you're new to this.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 3, 2011
  5. Rick A

    Rick A Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,417
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Location:
    northern Pa.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Start with the basics. As Mark states, shoot it at box speed. Developing is a different story. There are many good developers, Rodinal is one, Kodak D-76(or any cloned D-76) will do well. Follow the recommended developing time for the film. Don't concern yourself with experimenting or choosing someone elses time/combo for now, stick with basics until you are comfortable shooting and processing.
     
  6. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,510
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    +1

    Here's the Kodak tech pub.

    Actually any developer listed in this document would do fine. The info here if followed carefully will get you negatives that are easily printable. When you get this well practiced and know how you want to change your prints then you can refine your process in a meaningful direction.
     
  7. /dev/null

    /dev/null Member

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    The Netherla
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yes, I will shoot some rolls and test with several ISO settings, just to make sure there is nothing 'special' about this film like 'has to be at ISO 50' or so.

    I don't print, but will scan the negatives. But like to have a bit of contrasty negative before...
     
  8. Colin Corneau

    Colin Corneau Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,871
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Location:
    Brandon, MB
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Exactly what he said.
     
  9. Jeff Kubach

    Jeff Kubach Member

    Messages:
    6,930
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Just stick with the basics and have fun!

    Jeff
     
  10. Konical

    Konical Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,702
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Good Morning, /dev/null,

    Box rating, Kodak T-Max developer 1:7, 10 minutes as a starting point should give excellent results.

    Konical
     
  11. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,510
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Adjusting the Exposure Index or EI (ISO is a labratory tested rating of the film in a specific developer) adjusts where the shadows fall on the film curve. Using a lower number EI generally indicates using less development to "fit" the larger scene contrast range onto whatever output media you happen to use, and vice versa.

    You ought to get a fair feel for this after about 10 or 20 rolls at each EI.
     
  12. deleonjayson

    deleonjayson Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Start and do it by the book. Learn the rules first, then you can eventually break them by experimenting on other developers. I started with D-76 and Kodafix (all kodak products) for neutral results.
     
  13. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,972
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    on a web forum you're going to get suggestions from conservative to off the walls as to what you should do
    shoot a roll in similar lighting conditions and develop.
    bracket your exposures by 1 fstop each way ( over - normal - under )
    after you process your film, look at your negatives, notice which of the exposures "worked " for you ...

    then use that information for your next roll ..

    good luck !
    john
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. L Gebhardt

    L Gebhardt Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,769
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2003
    Location:
    NH
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I hate to disagree with the others here, but I would start out shooting it at 50 and developing about 15% less than the manufacturer recommends. I usually find that this gives better shadows, and easily printable (and scanable) negatives. I would then adjust from there.

    If you can, I would try to workout the exposure and development for good wet printing, even if you are scanning. This way you have the option of either. I find my scanner can yield good results with a range of negatives. Wet printing is harder if important shadow details fall on the toe of the film curve (as will most likely happen at box speed). With a scan you can fix this somewhat with a curves adjustment, but why not get it right to start with.
     
  16. chriscrawfordphoto

    chriscrawfordphoto Member

    Messages:
    1,178
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Fort Wayne,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The kind of overexposing and underdeveloping films shot under normal (not contrasty) light is common among large format photographers, but doesn't work well with 120 and 35mm films. Tmax 100 in D-76 1+1 for Kodak's recommended time at EI-100 is perfect for 120. Rodinal does lose a stop of speed with this film, so I shoot it at 50 for Rodinal developing.

    [​IMG]
    Tmax 100, 645 format, EI-100, D-76 1+1
     
  17. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,758
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Unlike many other black and white films, TMX 100 generally works best at the rated speed of 100.
    Over or under exposure can cause problems. So try this speed first until you get the dev times right.
    You want to be most concerned about the placement of deep shadows and those max highlights in
    which you wish to be able to print some detail. I have no experience with Rodinal. My preferred dev
    is PMK, but I have done TMX in 76, Perceptol, TMRS, HC-110 too. Most developers work well.
     
  18. chriscrawfordphoto

    chriscrawfordphoto Member

    Messages:
    1,178
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Fort Wayne,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Drew,

    What developing time are you using for PMK and Tmax 100? I love PMK for Tri-X but haven't had a chance to try to work out a developing time for Tmax 100.
     
  19. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,195
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Interestingly and backing Drew Wiley's point is that Ilford do not even quote a time for TMax 100 or 400with Perceptol at less than box speed.

    pentaxuser
     
  20. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Pentaxuser - in my opinion that is a faulty bit of documentation in Ilford's Perceptol instructions (indeed I find their recommendations for non-Ilford films somewhat simplified). I use a lot of TMX with Perceptol at various dilutions and if you want to maintain Perceptol's ultra-fine grain effects, TMX should be downrated (as should any film) if you want good shadow separations. With most general purpose developers box speed is quite usable for TMX (although I still prefer a little more shadow contrast so I rate it a little slower), but Perceptol is different. If you develop to box speed you lose Perceptol's characteristic qualities.
     
  21. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,195
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Let me preface the following remarks by stating I have never used Perceptol with TMax but we seem to be building a picture on APUG that Perceptol always needs a one stop reduction or even more for any film.

    This may be the case but it just seems significant that for D100 Ilford gives a time at EI 50 but not for TMax 100.

    So did Ilford make a mistake with TMax 100 and 400 or simply not bother to try it at lower than box speed?

    Seems poor marketing to curtail tests on other makers' films. For the sake of a short saving on testing time Ilford gives the impression that no reduction in box speed is necessary and yet if it clearly is, the user then decides that Ilford can't be trusted on other makers' films so users move away from Perceptol and Ilford loses users.

    It just doesn't sound like the kind of Ilford that the vast majority of APUG puts its trust in


    pentaxuser
     
  22. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Not sure what to tell you. TMX 100 is not materially faster than Delta 100 in Perceptol. Nor is Acros. If a picture of Perceptol as a speed decreasing developer is being painted on APUG, it would be one of the few correct paintings on here :smile:

    Perceptol, like Microdol, achieves its extra-fine grain characteristics at the expense of speed. It's a tradeoff. One must avoid pushing Perceptol development to full film speed - even when diluted, or graininess quickly increases.

    Suggested exposure index and development instructions are usually good starting points, but we don't know exactly how Ilford evaluated TMX in Perceptol and how the measurements were made. In the end, sometimes certain suggested development times, exposure indices etc simply require a little more experimentation on the part of the user. The same can be said of some of Kodak's recommendations. Some of them seem plain wrong. It's nothing new.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 4, 2011
  23. wblynch

    wblynch Member

    Messages:
    1,646
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Location:
    Mission Viejo
    Shooter:
    127 Format
    Something else to consider... You can change the look of your photos by a greater degree with the use of colored filters. I think a red filter on the kind of pictures you describe might give you some pleasing results.
     
  24. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,510
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    +1

    Maybe keep a polarizer handy too.
     
  25. Jeff Kubach

    Jeff Kubach Member

    Messages:
    6,930
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Of course a yellow or orange filter could be good also.

    Jeff
     
  26. /dev/null

    /dev/null Member

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    The Netherla
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    So, thanks for all the info. I had to decide eventually, so chose the ISO100, shot a few rounds and developed in HC-110, as per Massive Dev Charts.

    Negatives look nice, but the scans will tell me what I want to know really. 1 down, 2 to go :wink: