RE: TMY (was Gum tonal range) (was Miracle size for gum)
Paul, First it is a true 400 speed film, if you are exposing at 200 then IMO, and other photographers that I know locally, you are over exposing thus increasing the appearance of grain especially in the highlights and important tonal areas like skin tones (although this maybe a quality one desires.) I don't use D-76 and haven't for years since it has limited stock solution life. There are times when I don't shoot enough film to make using D-76 economical. I prefer concentrates (except for Rodinal which I hate and IMO is extremely over rated, especially on APUG). For the past year or so I've been using TMAX developer. It's a concentrate and has a long shelf life reminiscent of HC-110 though I can't say if it will last that long. Diluted 1:7, contrast is much more controllable with longer development times, for me 8.5 minutes @ 75F for roll film (processed in a traditional roll film tank) makes very scan-able negatives. If you need to push a stop then 1:4 @ 75 F for 5.5 minutes for sheet film in a Jobo @ the slowest rotation and similar for roll film in a tank. You will need to come to grips with what ever development method you use since there are so many variations but I suggest you use Kodak's documentation for TMAX developer to start, it will get you very close to begin with. I tend to watch what I'm including in the frame, especially when it comes to highlights and of course you will need to take into account how you plan to use the negative. If you are printing to silver gelatin, or scanning, or contact printing for alt. processes, etc., etc,. etc, ,,,. I've been using a lot of fill flash for portraits recently and that can help manage extreme contrast for those subjects. But the grain size is gorgeous for a 400 speed film. I have a friend who is experimenting with 2 part Pyro-Cat and his results show that it can make some very fine negatives. And as Sandy King has pointed out, 2 part pyro-cat can make negs with extreme sharpness due to edge effects when stand developed. I'm sure I'll go back to pyro developers with this film but for now I'm using TMAX since I'm rebuilding my darkroom. As always your mileage <sp?> may vary. Don -----Original Message----- From: Paul Viapiano [mailto:viapiano@pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 2:08 PM To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca Subject: Re: TMY (was Gum tonal range) (was Miracle size for gum) Don, What developers do you like for TMY? And why? I haven't used it much, though on a trip this year I used a half dozen rolls. I processed with D76 1:1 in a rotary processor and found that even with the adjustment for the rotary I got pretty contrasty negs. Admittedly I was shooting it at ISO 200 without testing, and assumed that's why. I haven't tried another roll since... Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Bryant" <donsbryant@gmail.com> To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:02 AM Subject: RE: Gum tonal range (was Miracle size for gum) > Loris, > >> > Well, not everyone use T-Max films (I'm not much fond of them -> to be > frank, almost to the point of detesting). But point taken anyway. >> > > What's not to like about TMAX-400, especially the new version? It's an > outstanding film. Having tried it in sizes from 35mm to 4x5mm I've found > that it's one of the best 400 speed films to go through my cameras. > > Mind you, I also like Tri-X 400 and Tri-X 320, and HP5 , but TMY delivers > true box speed and has good reciprocity (with a number of non-staining > and > staining developers) as well which is something difficult to obtain with > other 400 speed B&W films. > > And it is very easy to push another stop or stop and a half without losing > shadow detail and pumping up the grain. TMY-2 is a marvel IMO. > > Don Bryant > >
|