Anyone dialed in TMX 120 with PMK? got a free brick...

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

I was just given a brick of TMX 120, and I had absolutely terrible luck with TMX in 35mm w/ PMK (love TMY, never figured out TMX). Does anyone use this combo? I'm thinking the only way to get anything is going to be EI50 and shortened development times (maybe 5-6 minutes?)...But I'm not gonna knock a gift horse...or whatever that expression is(?).

I also use Rodinal now; might that be a better choice for this stuff? I wish I could get it to work for me...I've posted in the past but found no acceptable results. I love the look of it from other photographers...the grain structure is beautiful, so Rodinal might be the answer? Just dunno...shawn

Any advice appreciated...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), April 01, 2000

Answers

Before you give it away, try Rodinal 1:50 to 1:100 and D-76 1:1 and 1:3.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), April 02, 2000.

Thanks. Hey I wouldn't give it away John. I love the look of TMX, just have a hard time with it, the highs especially. I was thinking Rodinal myself, at 1:100, but I'm more worried about exposure and development times. Do you usually meter with TMX the same as other emulsions? And are times 'similar'? I always end up with cacky highs...maybe straight incident metering is in order, using the spot to balance the light only...? And N+ development...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), April 02, 2000.

I haven't used TMX in years, just never liked its "mechanical" look although otherwise it was ok. I used Rodinal 1:50 for EI 64 or so.

Anyway...to pull down the high end I'd try high-dilution Rodinal, D-76 1:3 or D-23 for about 2/3 the normal time followed by a borax bath. Note: with Rodinal if the EI gets way too low, add about 10-15g/L sodium sulfite to get 1/3 to 2/3 stop back.

Something else just came to mind; I believe John Sexton used T-Max dev at something like 1:15 to get a wide range with TMX without losing lots of speed. You might try that or maybe DD-X at significantly higher than specified dilutions.

Phil Davis' DI-13 is available from Photographers Formulary; it's intended for contraction or perhaps normal negs with TMX only and may help. I've never seen the formula for it.

Modern films stubbornly resist efforts to modify curve shape. Generally it's a straight line of at least 15 stops; that highlight contrast can be a bear to print. While it's easy to lower the CI (which may really be all you need to do) it mighty difficult to put a shoulder into them.

I don't know exactly what it is about TMX that I don't like...it's just kinda odd, but I grew up on Tri-X....

I use Delta 100 in D-76 1:1 or 1:3 for a medium-speed film.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), April 03, 2000.


> meter with TM

I did and it worked. If using a wide-area meter I bias it toward the darker tones, if using an incident-light meter I use the average between the reading with the cell pointed at the camera and then with the cell shaded from direct light, and if using a spot meter I meter the darkest thing in which I want good detail and put it on Zone III. I then check the light areas and if important light tones are higher than Zone VIII usually I do some contraction.

I don't get real involved; if the scene is the usual Zone III-VIII or so I give normal development and if the range is significantly wider than that I just develop the film in D-76 1:3 for the 1:1 time. Most everything prints with from zero to 40M filtration.

Just thought of something else; the paper you use has a drastic effect. A neg that prints really contrasty on Agfa MCP will often print with medium contrast on Ilford MG IV etc. Or Ilford MG FB prints a little contrastier than Ilford MG WT.

In an RC paper, Ilford MG IV can be a particularly good match for modern films because it has somewhat lower highlight contrast than older-style papers.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), April 03, 2000.


I think this is the "T-Max post" I've been looking for, John: THANKS! You have probably nailed it for me. My metering is fine by what you're saying (as for metering the subject). I think what is going to work for me, or get me a lot closer, is a lower EI and contracted development. I never rated TMX less than 80ISO, and I bet you the blown-out highlights were caused by my attempts to make up for the lack of lows with extended development (wrong approach altogether!). Now that I have lots (for me) of artificial light, I've been shooting Technical Pan at ISO 16 and contracting the development with PMK to 6:30min--resulting in detailed lows and detailed highs; it has made a whole world of difference. I bet you, based on your post, it's going to be as simple with TMX. I'll start with ISO64 and 6min at 1:50 in Rodinal, metering normally.

Thanks a lot John. shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), April 03, 2000.



I rate T-Max 100 at 64 and develop in PMK for 13 minutes at 70 degrees.

I rate T-Max 100 at 50 and develop in Rodinal (1:75) for 9.5 minutes at 70 degrees.

-- (edbuffaloe@unblinkingeye.com), April 03, 2000.


Ed, why the heck are my times always so much shorter than yours, and everyone else's? Seriously, I am sure if I ever put TMX in PMK for 13 minutes I have a two-tone, white-and-black negative...I am obviously doing something consistently WAY different than others...? Not than I'm complaining, it's just curious...although, it might also explain why I don't even look at a negative in the enlarger without cranking the magenta up to 70cc's...hum

shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), April 03, 2000.


> my times always so much shorter

OK..for some reason you're getting lots of printing contrast...which is fine if that's what you want.

However, when you reduce development in order to get low-contrast negs, you also reduce the film's EI, and if you don't compensate for that you end up having to crank up the magenta....and then develop the film even less, causing more underexposure...

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), April 04, 2000.


Shawn ;

Here are my ratings for TMax100 in Rodinal 1:50, which I consider a phenomenal combination ;

ISO Mins @ 20C N+2 160 21 N+1 125 18 N 80 13 N-1 50 10.5 N-2 32 9

NB ; this is for 4x5 sheets, which I develop in a combi tank. I agitate for the first minute, and then for 10 seconds every 30 seconds thereafter (I know that some people will find this excessive, but it just works for me). If you are taking mainly portraits or fashion shots, try some of the different ratings with careful exposure placement to see the effect on skin tones and textures, and overall tonal control.

-- David Hedley (djhedley@yahoo.com), April 04, 2000.


Looks like my careful formatting has been messed up, but I hope the above is still comprehensible ; i.e. for N+2, rate at 160, and develop for 21 minutes, etc.

I might also add that Rodinal is rather safer than pyro to work with, especially if you do a lot of developing and are thereby exposed to chemicals regularly.

-- David Hedley (djhedley@yahoo.com), April 04, 2000.



Why my developing times may be longer than yours: I print with a diffuse light source, so my negatives need to be a little denser than for a condenser source. I typically keep agitation to a minimum-- twice per minute for PMK, and once per minute for Rodinal. In full blazing Texas sun, my times give me negatives that will print well on a grade 1 paper.

-- (edbuffaloe@unblinkingeye.com), April 04, 2000.

I have measured the true film speed of TMX using a calibrated color transmission densitometer on film developed in PMK. The speed (0.1>B+F) is 64. I measured the proper development time (zone VIII on the 11 zone scale per AA) as 15M@68F. Using John Placko's temperature conversion chart, this relates to 13.5M@70F, very close to Ed's time. These negatives print on grade 2. If you are getting unusually contrasty negatives, either your temperature is not controlled well, your timer is running slow, or your dillution is incorrect. TMX/PMK is an excellent combination; it would be worth the effort to sort out you problem.

-- Michael D Fraser (mdfraser@earthlink.net), April 16, 2000.

You might want to try XTOL 1:3 rate at 80-100 my favarite for this film.

-- Eric Williams (gldn@hotmail.com), April 18, 2000.

Rodinal doesn't seem to be the best choice of developers for t-grain films, at least with what I've seen. (Practical Photography did a neat test of various films in a few different developers and this certainly seemed to be true.)

On the other hand, I've gotten wonderful results with both TMX and TMY in XTOL 1:1 and Ilford ID-11 1:1.

-- Jim MacKenzie (photojim@yahoo.com), April 26, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ