Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,678   Posts: 1,482,167   Online: 1101
      
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 87

Thread: TMAX XTOL

  1. #11
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,985
    Images
    279
    That's at B&H Photo...
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  2. #12
    stevebarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    lake worth FL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    134
    Images
    5
    I was getting the Tri-X from freestyle
    steve barry
    my stuff

  3. #13
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,985
    Images
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by stevebarry View Post
    I was getting the Tri-X from freestyle
    Not fair. I use Arista Premium too, because I love Tri-X, and it's inexpensive, so to me it makes no sense to pay 40-50% more for the same film in a different box.
    But if you like TMax, then you should buy TMax, regardless of cost. Compared to the time and effort you put into making your photographs, from exposure to finished print, the cost of film is insignificant even if it was $10/roll.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  4. #14
    stevebarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    lake worth FL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    134
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Not fair. I use Arista Premium too, because I love Tri-X, and it's inexpensive, so to me it makes no sense to pay 40-50% more for the same film in a different box.
    But if you like TMax, then you should buy TMax, regardless of cost. Compared to the time and effort you put into making your photographs, from exposure to finished print, the cost of film is insignificant even if it was $10/roll.
    I agree with you 100%

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
    steve barry
    my stuff

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    111
    I put my TMAX 100 in PMK Pyro and love it.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    The other day I devved a roll of Rollei Retro 100 in Rodinal 1+100 60min stand (as small a grain as you're getting with Rodinal, really).
    The same day I also did a few rolls of Tmax400 and TriX 400, some at 400, 800, and 1600, in Xtol, some at 1+0 and some 1+1, all fresh and ditched after, I don't reuse anything but fixer.
    All of the Tmax and TriX ended up smaller grain than the Rodinal, and just as sharp (can't compare tonal range easily though, the high-speeds were shot indoors, stupidly-high contrast with spotlights on faces on a stage and black background, the rollei was outdoors).

    Now the question, do I stick with my Tmax/TriX + Xtol (which I at least know works well), or would my new bag of Microphen give worse/same/better results than the Xtol for pushing?
    (And should I ditch the Rodinal stand and use Xtol for slow-speeds too?)
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

  7. #17
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,282
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Croubie View Post
    The other day I devved a roll of Rollei Retro 100 in Rodinal 1+100 60min stand (as small a grain as you're getting with Rodinal, really).
    The same day I also did a few rolls of Tmax400 and TriX 400, some at 400, 800, and 1600, in Xtol, some at 1+0 and some 1+1, all fresh and ditched after, I don't reuse anything but fixer.
    All of the Tmax and TriX ended up smaller grain than the Rodinal, and just as sharp (can't compare tonal range easily though, the high-speeds were shot indoors, stupidly-high contrast with spotlights on faces on a stage and black background, the rollei was outdoors).

    Now the question, do I stick with my Tmax/TriX + Xtol (which I at least know works well), or would my new bag of Microphen give worse/same/better results than the Xtol for pushing?
    (And should I ditch the Rodinal stand and use Xtol for slow-speeds too?)
    Yes

    Giggle
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    354
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Not fair. I use Arista Premium too, because I love Tri-X, and it's inexpensive, so to me it makes no sense to pay 40-50% more for the same film in a different box.
    But if you like TMax, then you should buy TMax, regardless of cost. Compared to the time and effort you put into making your photographs, from exposure to finished print, the cost of film is insignificant even if it was $10/roll.
    +1. The cost of film is fairly negligible overall, compared to all other costs to photography and print making. But for some, especially students, their budget may be quite tight, and then Arista Premium is very attractive. I try to use the best film I can afford, so that afterwards if there is a special negative, I don't have regrets about the medium it was captured on. And of course it has to do with one's visualisation of how one would want the print to look etc. But I also believe if a picture is worth taking, it is better to capture it on any film, rather than none.

    I have used Acros fairly extensively, and develop in Rodinal 1:50 with gentle and infrequent agitation. It gives fine grain and does a bit of highlight compensation. One does have to watch the highlights with Acros. TMax 100 may be the better film for you if that is a worry. I am not sure what you mean when you say the midtones are flat. It can be the particular lighting conditions, or maybe the way you develop. Aren't you over-agitating? That is one of the main issues when a negative looks flat, and it causes other types of problems too. Flatness mostly lies in micro-contrast and not in the overall tone curve. It is that which makes eyes look dull and foliage not to sparkle etc., and it is very sensitive to agitation with some developers and dilutions. I wouldn't know what applies in your case without more data. My Acros negatives look and print fine, and they do not look dull to me. Acros is about the only film where I have virtually no worries about grain in 35 mm. I also use FP4+ and HP5+, and TriX and TMax400, from time to time. But in all those cases I accept some grain as trade-off for speed, or I like the look of the film, in spite (or maybe because) of grain. Shooting HP5+ or TriX in 35mm makes the grain very obvious, depending on how it is developed, and it can give a nice effect on the smaller negative that would be lost with MF.

    Rodinal and HC-110 are very similar, and are "honest" grain developers, i.e. they show the grain as it is. Fine-grain developers in many cases can be destructive of very fine detail, but one would have to have the lenses and technique that resolve those details to begin with to worry about it. It is an often discussed topic, how to get the least grain for a given film or developer, or combination of the two. So there are a few ideas around. The smaller the format, the more reason to pay attention to it. To the best of my knowledge, high temperatures are not good, and one should try to develop as cool as possible. With Rodinal, developing at 16 - 18 °C might even be preferred. 25 °C would not be recommended. I would think the same applies to HC-110, and possibly to other non-solvent developers as well.

  9. #19
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,467
    Images
    28
    I also think Acros and HC-110 is a poor combination for similar reasons, use any other developer with it.

  10. #20
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,444
    I develop at 25c because my CPE-2 can raise but not lower the temperature and in summer my solutions are about that temperature at ambient. I can't tell any difference between these negatives and those developed cooler as long as I adjust times to give the same contrast.

    This is, though, with different developers and ice heard this "don't use warm Rodinal" before too. It might be a reason Rodinal wouldn't be a good developer for me.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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