Tmax+Contrasty Lighting TEST

[mike goldberg]

Hi all...

Tmax 400 has long been a favorite of mine, and I look forward to Kodak's new, improved version when it gets here. Meanwhile, in the "land of abundant sunshine," users of 400 films need to find ways of... you guessed it, retaining shadow detail and keeping highs from blocking up. I do hope that my post here supports the "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights," post... elsewhere in Darkroom.

All pix, unless otherwise noted, were with an M2+Summaron 35/2.8. A fresh roll of the "old" Tmax 400, also known as "TMY" was exposed at ISO 250 in late afternoon and early morning light. Development in HC-110, 1:14 was held back around 15% to 12 minutes at 72f. My times & temp are adjusted seasonally, by the temp of the filtered wash water. I agitate in a 2-reel stainless tank, 30 seconds initially, then 2 turns of the tank every 2-minutes.

In the Thumbnail pix below there is no cropping and no digital sharpening [with Resizing]... except for one of the 2 portraits, which required a minor repair. The sign in the 3rd image here, says this is the Daniel family home.

More pix follow...

 

[mike goldberg]

Tmax+Contrasty Lighting TEST-2

Tenement stairs

Black cat [J8, 50/2 modified]

House in late afternoon light

 

[mike goldberg]

Tmax+Contrasty Lighting TEST-3

Barak1 with hat near bright window

Barak2 with hat near bright window

BOTH at 1/125, f4 with a J8, 50/2 [modified] on a Leica M2.

Feedback welcome.
Ciao,

 

[Ronald M]

This is coming up about a stop light and there is no detail in the highlites because of it. There is too much shadow detail which will disappear when you darken them up.

 

[mike goldberg]

The value of your comment, Ron, appears to be in this: If I had exposed the Tmax 400... at 400 like I usually do, I would have been better off. Generally, I do not overdevelop.
Cheers...

 

[FrankS]

Well done, Mike. The unknown variable here is the null/default settings of your scanner for contrast and brightness. To your eye, how do the negatives look to you with regards to density and contrast? I'm thinking that these are excellent negs that would print well. There is abundant shadow detail as Ron has said, and the images are a bit too light so darkening would both bring back the highlight detail and darken the shadows acceptably. If you had exposed at iso 400, the shadows may have gone too dark/muddy. Excellent exposure and development, IMO.

 

[eric]

Socal has abundant sunshine as well and I've been using Delta 400 with PMK with very good results. Highlights are so much easier to print. Its one of the benefits of staining developers.

 

[sanmich]

Hi Mike

I would say the improved Tmax is ... Tri-X 😀

I had inconsistent results with Tmax and decided to move to tri-X.
How do they say: it wasn't the film it was me...

Tri-x is so much tolerant and consistant in results. I Never looked back....

I use a 2-bath developer called Emofin (Tetenal). I have to buy it in europe...

The results are ok and that's what I am using for now.

In parallel, I am testing a homebrew divided D76 that seems to work pretty well (the Vestal formula)

I'll be glad to compare some negs when we meet...🙂

meanwhile I'll quote an Israeli photographer that I asked "how the heck can I get decent results with such a light??!!"

He answered: "Do like many other Israeli photogs: shoot in the winter, print in the summer"

I would add that nothing can replace a nice lighting, even if you control the contrast, the flatness of the harsh light around here is something problematic.

Cheers

Michael

 

[Keith]

Hi Mike,

I never really liked Tmax until I developed some myself and saw that it does have potential to be a nice film and produce good photgraphs ... I've always had it lab developed and never liked the results much.

The light here is also a bit of a nightmare with it's intensity and one of the major problems I have is controlling the glare from the Australian foliage when photographing outdoors on 'sunny 22' days. It can create these unpleasant dappled blown out highlights that make me grind my teeth. As I learn more about darkroom technique by hands on and reading these sort of threads I will learn to create some sort of compromise hopefully ... but at the moment bright days are avoided for photography by me!

I like your photos and Ronald's comment about them being a little light is subjective to my mind. Each person has their own vision of how their photography should look and I know that I tend to be the other way and over darken my images at times ... but that's how I like them!

Cheers from downunder! 🙂

 

[mike goldberg]

Thanks all above. Actually, I chuckle a bit as I read comments on the light here! We do have clouds, tho' more in the winter. As for Tri-X, I used it for a lot of years, and have difficulty in getting it in Israel. Tmax is widely available and cheaper than HP5+. Insofar as I know, Ruben exposes for contrasty light and for flat or available light, in separate camaras.

I don't really remember how I arrived at the HC-110, 1:14 dilution. I usually check in with Covington before I develop:

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/

My agitation was arrived at through contact with another Israeli RFF member.
It's a good feeling to have a scheme that is working, and I look forward to the
new Tmax.
Ciao, Mike

 

[40oz]

personally, I just stopped trying to use a 400 film in daylight. If I have to, I expose Tri-X at 200 EI. If possible, I pull the whole roll, otherwise just under-expose by a stop and develop normally. But I prefer to make it an opportunity to use a slower film 🙂