Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,287   Posts: 1,535,333   Online: 857
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    11

    Film Gurus: Who shoots either TMAX 100 or Delta 100 at ISO 50?

    First off, I'm still a little new to developing, but I've found that I like PanF+, but I was given 10 rolls each of TMAX 100 and Delta 100. However, my reason for liking PanF+ is that I like shooting on sunny days, and 50 gives me more versatility to open up the lens. I'm shooting 35mm film on a Leica IIIf.

    So now that I have all this film to burn, what is everyone's experience shooting either TMAX 100 or Delta 100 at 50. What kind of development processes do you use and what kind of results do you get? For the record, I have been using Ilfosol 3 which was great to learn with, however I'm not opposed to trying something new as long as it's still relatively easy to work with. And I prefer to stick to ISO50 vs. 64 or 80 (I use the sunny 16 rule and no meter, and I'm not sure my little brain would like me trying to compound things further by throwing half or third stops in the mix). Also, I don't print my negatives in the darkroom. I (gasp) scan them, if that matters or not.

    Thanks!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,622
    A lot of this will come down to personal preference. I've used TMax 100 and Delta 100 almost exclusively, developed in a few different developers and I shoot both of them at an exposure index of 50 under normal conditions anyway. My exposure index is actually 64 with these films but I consider 1/3 stop virtually meaningless and within the margin or error. You have to then do a few tests to find the development times that work for you shooting at 50.

    If you are pleased with Ilfosol 3, no reason to switch. It is a little grainier than ID-11/D-76 but probably slightly sharper, and these are very fine grained films to begin with (Delta 100 is about the same as Pan F and TMax 100 is even finer grained). The two films will work well in a variety of general purpose developers. ID-11/D-76 diluted 1+1 or more, XTOL diluted 1+1 or more, etc etc. Stick with Ilfosol if it is working well for you.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    You should have no problem shooting Tmax 100 at ISO 50 using the Sunny 16 rule. Truth is that's what I would recommend to a person who wanted to try out Tmax 100 without doing proper metering/testing. Always better to slightly over-expose than under-expose. I've never used Ilfosol 3 so I can't comment on it, but there are many good developers out there that work just peachy with Tmax 100. Personally, I think a very good combo to use is Tmax100 and Rodinal(Adonal, R09 etc.). I use it with Tmax 100 and Tmy-2 400 as a stand developer( 1:100 for 60 min.) when I've shot in very harsh lighting like, say a heavy sunny snow scene. Or for normal scenes it's 1:50. I think every darkroom warrants a bottle of Rodinal and believe it's one of the best "standby developers" out there. You use so small of an amount that it makes the cost per roll almost nothing, it lasts forever on your shelf, it's extremely simple and easy to use and it gives great looking(sharp) negatives. So, if I were you and wanted to try a slightly different developer Rodinal would be it. Plus, it's been around in one form or another since before the first automobile hit the road and there is a ton on info on the NET about its use. Whatever you do have fun! JohnW

  4. #4
    Newt_on_Swings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,813

    Film Gurus: Who shoots either TMAX 100 or Delta 100 at ISO 50?

    Works fine at 50, just develop in a bit less time (15-20%) than what you would at box. Both are nice films, I like tmax a bit better though.

  5. #5
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by RallyFan View Post
    And I prefer to stick to ISO50 vs. 64 or 80 (I use the sunny 16 rule and no meter, and I'm not sure my little brain would like me trying to compound things further by throwing half or third stops in the mix).
    I think it does matter a bit to what density range film is developed for a scanning workflow versus darkroom printing, but I'm not up on that part of it. I have an established time for shooting TMX at EI50 when I am planning for N-3 development with hc-110 (1:119), but that is the only time I expose TMX at that rating. With t-grain films, I'm of the opinion that 1/3 stop increments can be important as opposed to traditional grain films like tri-x, it is a well known fact that t-grain films are more sensitive to exposure and processing inconsistencies, just something to think about.

    Chuck

  6. #6
    MartinCrabtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Back in the hills
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    641
    Images
    2
    I use a Weston Master II meter so use an EI of 80 with either. Agrees with my in camera meter within 1/3 stop and turns out well enough for me.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    24
    I rate all my films at half box speed than develop in Microdol-X 1:3, time is reduced by 15%. Gives very nice tonality I find. Not got any TMAX examples done this way but have a 100ft of TMAX 100 in the fridge so will be trying it fairly soon. This is how it works with FP4+, rated at 64, scanned on my Plustek 7600i. I find denser negatives scan best, and most of my best scans have been with negatives that would probably be too dense for printing well, so I also say err on the side of overexposure than under.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Scan-130206-0011-WEB.jpg   Scan-130206-0012-WEB.jpg   Scan-130206-0014-WEB.jpg  

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    662
    If you wish to shoot an ASA 100 film using the apertures you like with ASA 50 film, simply install a 1-stop 0.3 neutral density filter.

    Depending on the maker’s practices, this might be marked “NDX2” (Hoya for example).

  9. #9
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,372
    Images
    4
    FWIW, I prefer TMX-100 over Delta.

    The finest grain in a pictorial film is to be had with TMax-100 developed in Microdol-X (sadly no longer made, but Photographers' Formulary and Ilford make work-alikes [which I haven't tried, having a large stock of M-X...).

    I also like the idea of shooting wide open in the sunlight - I shoot Tech-Pan at f2.0 and 1/1000 for my version of 'Sunny-11' (we never get an f/16'th worth of sun in Cleveland). A medium-yellow or yellow-green filter will give a 1 stop decrease in film speed if you want to shoot TMX at ASA 50; the filter will also give better tone rendition.

    My experience is that TMX has about the same tolerance for overexposure as color negative film - you could probably expose it at ASA 12 and get printable negatives (that's printable, as opposed to optimum).

    TMX's huge tolerance to overexposure means it has no shoulder to speak of. This means that highlight density just goes up and up - and beyond the range of the paper when it comes time to make a print. The naive interpretation is that the film blocks highlights - but the truth is otherwise, the highlight detail isn't blocked but may require burning in. The resulting prints have lovely highlight detail but take a bit more work to make.

    Films with a shoulder compress the highlights. This means the negatives are easier to print and need less highlight burning. But it also means that the highlight detail you can get is all compressed. The shoulder in traditional films like Tri-X is the reason for the old split-grade adage to burn highlights with a #5 filter - the reason being an attempt to recover some of the compressed highlight detail. With TMax films there is no need to burn with a #5 as the detail isn't compressed.

    TMax films change contrast with over or under development much more quickly than traditional films. Following Kodak's directions isn't hard, though, and a 15 second variation won't make any difference that you can see. The only place this sensitivity comes into play is when developing for N- or N+ contrast when playing around with the Zone system - the development change for a one-zone contrast shift is about 10% as opposed to 15% for old-technology films. The same sensitivity holds with temperature, but a $9 digital cooking thermometer from Target will provide all the accuracy one could ever need for measuring developer temperature.
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    24
    That's great info, cheers Nicholas. I'll soon be trying TMAX 100 shot at 50 in Microdol-X 1:3. I've got FP4 and FP4+ (I have a lot of both) dialled in with this method, but TMAX 100 sounds like it will be really nice in Microdol-X so I'll give it a try as soon as we get some light here.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin