Follow up to TD-3 and Tech Pan : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

Hi all,

I wanted to follow up on another post regarding this subject.

I shot and developed my first roll of 35mm Tech Pan last night. Mainly, I wanted to get some test data to set my personal EI before I head off into the woods with this stuff. I exposed at ASA 50 with +/-2 full stops of 1/3 step bracketing for Zone 1, 5, and 8. ( I then finished up the last few frames on the roll with some high contrast and high detail picks at ASA 50 ).

I hand developed in 500 ml. of 68 degree TD-3 for 20 minutes using the 10 inversion per 3 minute method. The TD-3 was mixed 50ml of Solution A, 50ml of Solution B and 400ml of Distilled Water.

I was very supprised to find the negatives to be REALLY thin. If I am to believe my results the negatives that came out correctly are shot at ASA 12! These ended up with a Zone 1 density of .09 /fbf and had pretty appropriate densities for Zones 5 and 8. ( Once I repeat my Zone 1 testing I will adjust development for the high values.)

The interesting thing is that the pictorial shots, while very thin, have increadable detail and almost no grain at all, I had a hard time finding the grain with an Omega grain focuser at 8x10!

I will reshoot some more this weekend, time permitting, and post another continuation.

I have a couple of questions for those of you who have used TD-3 in the past. What ASA did you end up with, was that checked with a densitometer or "eyeballed", and what development method did you use.

Best Regards, -harry

-- Harry Pluta (, January 29, 2000


I forgot to mention, I used a 2 minute pre soak as per the TD-3 instructions.


-- Harry Pluta (, January 29, 2000.

The thinness may in part be the base, which LOOKS thin even with Technidol. But I'm not surprised by the low numbers, either. I really don't think there is a way to get better ISO out of TP. 50 is probably the highest with the best of luck in combinations. I know someone who shot at 50 and developed in XTol. It was gross.

I've still to do it to any large extent, but I really think TP is an ISO 12 emulsion...

-- shawn gibson (, January 29, 2000.

Sorry I can't comment directly on your TD-3 results Harry. :-(

-- shawn gibson (, January 29, 2000.


Thanks for the feedback. The .09 density was calculated above the filmbase and fog reading. This eliminates any varience in emulsion, fogginf, or staining. The way I work, using a grade 2 paper, a .1 density above fb/f gives good detail in the shadow areas, less then this and my shadows tend to go black.

Best Regards

-- Harry Pluta (, January 29, 2000.

I gave TD-3 a try a while back; also ended up with EI 12 and no particular advantages in curve shape etc.

Lately I've tried Ethol TEC with a couple of rolls of TP; TEC 1:15 (not the recommended 1:31) 6'/68F EI 50. At first I thought I'd made a mistake, but a second test confirmed EI 50 for .10 DU above fb&f with a reasonable CI and curve shape.

-- John Hicks (, January 29, 2000.


I use the same dilution and agitation method you describe except I go for 23 minutes. I shoot at 25 and I get detailed shodows and incredibly fine grain. I agree the neg's appear thin but they print beautifully on grade 3 oriental FB.

-- Walter Massa (, January 29, 2000.

Hi again,

I just finished up a second roll. This one I based on 12 ASA and bracketed around that number. I got a .12 for my Zone 1 value which I expected, but I found something I had missed on my first roll, maximum density for this film ( the way I process it )is 1.14 above fb&f! This would seem to indicate that a base density around .06 is ok, which would mean I should be shooting around ASA 25. I can live with that!

We had a great snow fall last night so once it stops I will go out and shoot a couple of rolls in the woods. I plan to bracket around ASA 25 and then see what prints well. I will post back later this week once I've had a chance to do some printing.

Thanks for all the feedback,

-- Harry Pluta (, January 30, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ