Only with Xtol

[jp498]

The film is versatile and Thomas is right.

I use Xtol 1+1 for contrast, and PMK when I want to tame the contrast.

If the lack of contrast and flat diagnosis is from scanning, that means you are not completing the computer process which involves shaping the curve in image editing software. Raw scans look a little flat, but it's easy to fix. The same negatives print wonderful though in the darkroom. Then it's clearly a computer process issue rather than a film or chemical issue.

I have no idea what caused bands/layers for the OP without looking at the negs.

[Pasto]

I had similar problems (i.e., negative contrast) early on in my calibration with Xtol undiluted and TMY. No more problems (EI 320, Xtol straight, 6:15 continuouse agitation in a JOBO at 20C). Now that I'm starting out with TMX, I'm getting relatively thin and flat negatives. It took me about 6-7 months with the TMY/Xtol combination (and about 80 rolls of 120) before figuring it out. I expect the same learnig curve with TMX...isn't this fun

[pentaxuser]

Well the cat looks flat, Thomas, in the sense of a certain worldly "ennui" that only cats can manage in portraits and they never charge extra for it.

It's a great look. No training required


pentaxuser

[mike c]

If you add foto flo to the tank for the last step before drying,and don't scrub the tank and reel after,that would cause foaming with the developer on next use.

Mike

[Trask]

I'm sorry, but I cannot just stand by and look when somebody gives TMax film a categorically 'flat' verdict.
All of the attached pics are TMax 100 and 400 film.
They are not flat, because I took time to understand TMax film, how to properly expose and process them. All in replenished Xtol. You control contrast via exposure and development, and if you can't get enough contrast from the film, or as much contrast as you WANT, don't blame the film.

Back on track. Sorry to deviate from the original topic.

Thomas,

That's a great shot of the boy. Grainless, crispy black and white in the shirt, perfect skin tone. Just great.

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thomas,

That's a great shot of the boy. Grainless, crispy black and white in the shirt, perfect skin tone. Just great.

Thanks! That one's Pentax 35mm TMX in replenished Xtol. The other two are Hasselblad. Kitten is TMX and wedding is TMY.

[waynecrider]

I'm sorry, but I cannot just stand by and look when somebody gives TMax film a categorically 'flat' verdict.
All of the attached pics are TMax 100 and 400 film.
They are not flat, because I took time to understand TMax film, how to properly expose and process them. All in replenished Xtol. You control contrast via exposure and development, and if you can't get enough contrast from the film, or as much contrast as you WANT, don't blame the film.

Back on track. Sorry to deviate from the original topic.

Sorry forgot to add (and I was actually thinking about it believe it or not) that my results were per chart recommendations. I do know, as probably everyone else has read over the years, that Tmax films respond to shorter changes in developing regime and that all films are variable in developing. But really, thanks for jumping on my ass about it. I don't want to give out bad info to the newbies.

[ianstamatic]

I use xtol in my phototherm 1:1 and straight and love it. I dilute it in a 3 lite soda bottle and mix as needed. Awesome results from 400 iso film esp

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

[Sirius Glass]

If you dilute XTOL, then the solution is a one shot developer PERIOD. Read the data sheet.

If you use XTOL full strength, then increase the development time per the instruction sheet.

I recommend that you start with a fresh batch of XTOL and replenish with 170ml per roll after time that you develop with it. The tonality is much better. See previous threads on this subject of APUG. Also see the data sheet.

Steve

[MattKing]

Steve:

Did you really mean to say 170 ml? Kodak recommends 70 ml (IIRC).

EDIT: Kodak's recommendation is 70 ml. See page 4 of J109:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe.../j109/j109.pdf