Re: T-Max 400 / Tri-X revisited

Tom Ferguson (tomf2468@pipeline.com)
Mon, 26 Jan 1998 09:05:13 -0800

FotoDave <FotoDave@aol.com> wrote:
>SNIP<
>Thinking about it again, I do see the point that Tri-X might be considered
>"more forgiving." Maybe TMax can be considered "beautiful" only when processed
>and exposed in a carefully controlled situation.
>
>What I would like to know is what exactly people mean when they say that Tri-X
>is more forgiving while TMax is not. Are you talking about exposure or
>development or both? When you say TMax is less forgiving, what kind of
>problem(s) have you encountered?
>
>SNIP<
>
>1. Why do you say Tri-X is more forgiving? (Please be as descriptive as
>possible)

Tri-X is "more forgiving" because it has (correction, in my tests it had) a
longer and softer toe and shoulder. If you underexpose Tri-X by 1 stop,
you've got poor shadow detail, do the same to T-Max and you've got
virtually clear film. Include a few highlights a stop beyond zone 8 that
you actually wanted some detail in on Tri-X and they will be perhaps 2/3
stop "blown out, on T-Max they will be the complete stop "blown out". But
once again, that is why I love it for most alt-processes, it retains it's
highlight detail way beyond standard silver densities.

>2. What problem(s) have you had with TMax?

Large format T-Max reacts very poorly to T-Max developer. I do have temp
control in the darkroom, and thus find it reasonable simple to work with.
I agree with the previous post: without temp control, try another film ;-(

I should state that most of my work is "in studio" and thus very controllable.

>3. If you do keep records, it would be helpful if you give the EI, developer,
>development temperatures and times for TMax and Tri-X.

All times are for "tray" development. I use 70 degree F because I can't
always get 68 degree F water (Southern California gets warm). Developer
concentrations are made from pure (strait out of the bottle) HC-110. These
times are for sheet film.

T-MAX 400
For silver gelatin printed with cold light (Not my favorite combination):
Normal EI 200 @ HC-110 @ 5:00 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 1 EI 200 @ HC-110 @ 8:15 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 2 EI 250 @ HC-110 @ 9:00 @ 40ml per liter @ 70 degree F

T-MAX 100
For silver gelatin printed with cold light (A very nice combination):
Normal EI 50 @ HC-110 @ 5:30 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 1 EI 50 @ HC-110 @ 9:00 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 2 EI 64 @ HC-110 @ 10:00 @ 40ml per liter @ 70 degree F

NOTE: I don't like short dev times (in trays I get "mottled" negs). Thus I
handle "minus" work for silver with SLIMT pre-bleaches, not altered
development.

T-MAX 400
For 50/50 Plat/Pallad printed on Platinotype developed in Ammonium Citrate
Minus 1 EI 125 @ HC-110 @ 7:15 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Normal EI 125 @ HC-110 @ 10:00 @ 30ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 1 EI 160 @ HC-110 @ 10:30 @ 50ml per liter @ 70 degree F
Plus 2 EI 200 @ HC-110 @ 11:30 @ 65ml per liter @ 70 degree F
the above plus 2 neg requires selenium toning to reach correct densities.

For pure palladium prints, add 5% to the developing time.
For gum or cyanotype negs increase EI by 1/3 stop, decrease dev time by 10%
(note that there are a lot of variable that could drastically change your
times with these processes: paper, formula, pigments, humidity,
astrological sign)

Remember, your mileage WILL vary. Try these as starting points, I hope
they help.

How did I come up with these combinations??? The usual unscientific tale.
I was started with 35mm Plus-X and D-76 as the "required" combo in a photo
class. After class tried Plus-X, Tri-X, HP-5, and T-Max (all 35mm in
D-76). Settled on a few films (for a few different situations). Years
later tried different developers on my favorite (now 4x5) films.

That is more than enough testing for me. I would much rather investigate
the different pictures and emotions possible using cyanotype versus
platinum than the difference in HC-110 versus Xtol or T-Max versus Tri-X.
That is both a fun and very worthwhile test!!!

tomf2468@pipeline.com (Tom Ferguson)