Who has TMAX 3200 examples? Please post.

[Tim Gray]

Juan, I think we are saying the same thing.

I was referring to your "normally longer times than recommended are better" comment, which I took to mean use longer times. The original poster also mentioned overdeveloping to be on the safe side. I found for the light I shoot in and the prints I make, the recommended times work out pretty good. And for someone who's never used the film before, the recommended times in standard developers are a pretty good starting point. Especially since they're likely to go off and shoot it at 3200 or 6400 and have their metering all over the place

I don't always get through a roll in one type of light, so middle of the road developing times are appropriate a lot of times. If I shot several rolls in a low contrast setting, I would leave it in the dev longer, you are correct. Likewise, high contrast lighting might call for a pull.

 

[filmfan]

I would like to see more photos and less discussion, for there is an entire forum out there for discussion. I do however appreciate the advice on dev times. Thanks guys.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I would like to see more photos and less discussion, for there is an entire forum out there for discussion. I do however appreciate the advice on dev times. Thanks guys.

Here you go:

 

[nathanp]

Not the best examples as I had a few er.. lapses in judgement but here's a couple more examples..

I bought one roll to see what it was like. It was shot at 1600 and developed in ID11 (stock) for er.. too long (my mum phoned during the development! I shouldn't have answered).
I've concluded that it would be great for certain types of photography, and would probably be a lot better in something other than ID11 (If I use it again I think I will get some TMax dev)

 

[Tim Gray]

I would like to see more photos and less discussion, for there is an entire forum out there for discussion.

And this is one of them

I linked to about 200 TMZ shots of mine. It's all I can provide.

 

[filmfan]

And this is one of them

I know, that is why I asked for less discussion... which was not solely directed at you of course.

Great photos from everyone. Makes me anticipate my results more.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Juan, I think we are saying the same thing.

I was referring to your "normally longer times than recommended are better" comment, which I took to mean use longer times. The original poster also mentioned overdeveloping to be on the safe side. I found for the light I shoot in and the prints I make, the recommended times work out pretty good. And for someone who's never used the film before, the recommended times in standard developers are a pretty good starting point. Especially since they're likely to go off and shoot it at 3200 or 6400 and have their metering all over the place

I don't always get through a roll in one type of light, so middle of the road developing times are appropriate a lot of times. If I shot several rolls in a low contrast setting, I would leave it in the dev longer, you are correct. Likewise, high contrast lighting might call for a pull.

Yes, Tim... We're saying the same.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I would like to see more photos and less discussion, for there is an entire forum out there for discussion. I do however appreciate the advice on dev times. Thanks guys.

I totally agree!

I started this some days ago:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88775

And nothing!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[pvdhaar]

I just dug up a couple of shots..

The common theme seems to be that it's got a lot of grain, and comes out with limited contrast when exposed at 3200 ISO.