T-Max 100 at 320 development times?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by jpa, Feb 25, 2013.

  1. jpa

    jpa Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    The Windy Ci
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I shot a roll of T-Max 100 at 320, mistakenly thinking that it was Tri-X. I can't seem to find any information regarding this.

    So, I'd like to know if anyone has any experience developing T-Max pushed to 320 ( I do not ). I'd prefer to use either Pyrocat HD, Rodinal or Finol, as those are the developers that I use most frequently ( and have on hand at the moment ). Any assistance is appreciated.

    Thanks,
    JP
     
  2. Helinophoto

    Helinophoto Member

    Messages:
    634
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well, according to Kodak, TMax 100 can be shot at 100 or 200 without needing to change the development time (weird).
    So, around 1/2 stop from that again.....(probably would have counted it as 1 stop myself and added 25% from ISO 100 times, as I don't really believe in the above mentioned statement).

    With Ethol, I see that someone had added 50% to the 100 ISO time to get to 320:
    http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=TMax+100&Developer=&mdc=Search

    Not sure if this helps, hope you can figure it out ^^
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2013
  3. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have pushed TMX to 400 using Xtol 1+1. Works great.

    With Rodinal, I'd use it dilute, like 1+75 or 1+100. Develop a long time, agitate 10 seconds every three minutes.

    A decent starting time for 1+100 would be 30 minutes.
     
  4. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,830
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Actually, not weird at all.

    "Pushing" doesn't significantly change the film's sensitivity, it just increases contrast.

    So while a a push development may improve the contrast in the near shadows (where underexposure will cause low contrast), it will also increase contrast in the highlights, which may very well be detrimental to the image.

    So Kodak is saying that the improvement you will gain in the shadows from a one stop push isn't worth the loss of quality in the highlights you will experience.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2013
  5. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,964
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    None of those developers would be very good for "pushing" Tmax 100. Can you get a hold of any D-76 or HC-110? Times and temps for both of those with Tmax 100 at 400 can be found here:

    http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php
     
  6. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,537
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'll second Thomas's XTOL suggestion but I'd dilute it 1+3 and reduce agitation (although this actually doesn't appear to help much with tabular films).
     
  7. jpa

    jpa Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    The Windy Ci
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thanks. X-Tol is one developer that I've always wanted to try out, but never did. I actually do have a bag of it that I bought about a year ago, but obviously never got around to mixing up.
     
  8. jpa

    jpa Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    The Windy Ci
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I do have a bottle of HC-110 lying about. It's a couple of years old, but I'm sure that it's fine. I never really got on with it, so I forgot all about it! I guess I'll go with that, since I'd rather travel the path of least resistance ( or at least the path of the tried and true... ).
     
  9. Helinophoto

    Helinophoto Member

    Messages:
    634
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Do a clip-test first, just to be sure it hasn't died on you (I hear it can die in the bag).
     
  10. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,473
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You don't mention how you meter. If you placed the deep shadows on zone IV or V then you should be OK. If you placed them on zone I or II then there will not be any useful exposure of the film in those areas. You need 4 or more silver atoms in your speck to be developable.
     
  11. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You know, the very best thing you could do would be to shoot another roll of TMax 100 at 320, and try different developing times. If you get too much contrast, you shorten development time. If you get too little, develop longer.
    The trick is to shoot in similar lighting conditions as the first roll you mistakenly shot.

    If your shots are important to you, you should do this testing before you attempt to develop the roll.

    Exposing TMX at 320 is not a disaster at all. I have purposely exposed TMX at 400, in order to mimic the tone curve of the now departed Tri-X 320. It works really well, as long as you use a developer that's efficient in the shadows. Xtol is perfect for this exercise. You might even see an improvement this way, since the toe of both TMax films (100 and 400) is abrupt, and with so much shadow detail, flare is more prominent. To expose less and let an efficient developer 'rescue' some of the shadow tones on the toe of the curve helps with flare, something that Tri-X 320 (and 400) does naturally.
     
  12. jpa

    jpa Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    The Windy Ci
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    OK, I developed the film in HC-110, solution B at 70 degrees C, as per the MDC. I altered the development time to 12 minutes, with agitation for the first minute, then 3 every minute, but at the halfway point, I decided to agitate every two minutes. They appear to be slightly over-developed, but I shouldn't have much problem printing them.

    Thanks for the assistance, people!
     
  13. rwreich

    rwreich Subscriber

    Messages:
    346
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Sorry, this is late - but I have a recipe for TMax 100 pushed to 320 for 9:30 at 21*C in 500ml of Ethol UFG (Stock).

    I haven't tried it, but there it is.
     
  14. Helinophoto

    Helinophoto Member

    Messages:
    634
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I see on MDC that 100 ISO is 6 minutes and 400 is 11,5 minutes. (at 68F)
    So, from that, and your initial results, maybe 9-10 minutes would be the sweet-spot? (that's around 50% increase in time from ISO 100).

    Good to hear that it wasn't a disaster though =)
     
  15. jpa

    jpa Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    The Windy Ci
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yes, you're most likely correct. I had already developed some film, and decided to try the T-Max. I saw the 11.5 minute time for T-max at 400, but in my mind I thought of it as "320". Guess I shouldn't have developed it as late as I did :sleeping:
     
  16. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,999
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format


    it was the 1L packages of xtol that died in the bag, kodak stopped packaging small amounts of xtol
    over a decade ago ... and extreme dilutions they used to recommend ( like 1:10 ) also caused "sudden death" ...
    if the OP has xtol that isn't 15 years old and in a 1L bag ... and isn't diluting more than 1:3 i think he will be fine :smile:

    john
    ( yes i have xperienced xtol sudden death but it was 15+ years ago )
     
  17. Helinophoto

    Helinophoto Member

    Messages:
    634
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ah, thanks Jnanian for clarifying, I've been warned so many times myself that I've been expecting my xtol-bag to yawn out its death moan from the kitchen cupboard at any moment :smile: (been stored for a year now)