Kodak T-Max 400 Traits?

[Villanova]

Hi RFF,

I'm thinking of switching my daily film to Kodak T-Max 400. Can anyone comment or link me to a site that sums up its characteristics/tonality (aside from the finer grain)?

(I was/am a regular HP5 Plus and Tri-X 400 shooter.)

 

[Erik van Straten]

I'm thinking of switching my daily film to Kodak T-Max 400.

That would be a very wise decision. See this thread: Tmax400 Images Thread.

Erik.

 

[Villanova]

That would be a very wise decision. See this thread: Tmax400 Images Thread.

Erik.

How did I miss this thread? Thanks, Erik.

 

[charjohncarter]

Comment, I like Tmax 400 if exposed properly and develop properly it has great tones, you do have to agitate correctly to get proper highlights, but when you get them they are great. Some people feel that that it is too fine grain and ends up looking digital, this is not a concern with me.

I use HC-110h to develop and I think my time is 11:45, with 30 seconds initial agitation, and then 3 inversion at 10, 6, 2 minutes; 68 degrees (20 C).

Some great photographers use Tmax 400-2: John Sexton comes to mind, you can look at his work on the NET. He has written much on this subject and you will find it also on the web. He also did a web cast about Tmax400-2.

One feeling I have about TMY-2 is that with 35mm you can turn our RF or SLR into medium format.

This one you can see it handles highlights well:

TriX HC-110h Rodinal by John Carter, on Flickr

This is my first shot (when I became aware of it) with Tmax 400; P&S camera with fill flash:

From my first roll of TMY-about 1997-8 by John Carter, on Flickr

And this one shows how it can handle blacks, another pocket camera (Konica C35);

Tmax400-HC-110h-Rodinal by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[airfrogusmc]

Hi RFF,

I'm thinking of switching my daily film to Kodak T-Max 400. Can anyone comment or link me to a site that sums up its characteristics/tonality (aside from the finer grain)?

(I was/am a regular HP5 Plus and Tri-X 400 shooter.)

Years ago I tested t max 400 (might be a different film now) and found with rodinal 1:50 it had an almost straight line toe. Most toe parts of film curves are curves with some blocking up of low tones as t max 400 does with most developers as do most B&W films in the toe area of the curve. That's why it's called a curve. But with rodinal at 1:50 it behaves a lot like tri-x 320 professional and what Adams called dilution C for HC 110. where the toe is more of a straight line like the straight line portion of the film curve which is about zone II through about zone IX. So lots of shadow detail. At 1:25 it behaves more like a traditional B&W film and developer combo (film curve)

Film is only one part of the equation. Matching it with the right developer is the other. For tonality this is a great combo. But remember rodinal is a true acutance developer. It will not soften the silver halide crystals thus showing more grain and the images will be very sharp.

Not an issue if shooting with large or medium format film but some do not like the appearance of more grain which will really become more apparent with smaller 135 format films. I never minded the grain.

 

[charjohncarter]

Years ago I tested t max 400 (might be a different film now) and found with rodinal 1:50 it had an almost straight line toe. Most toe parts of film curves are curves with some blocking up of low tones as t max 400 does with most developers as do most B&W films in the toe area of the curve. That's why it's called a curve. But with rodinal at 1:50 it behaves a lot like tri-x 320 professional and what Adams called dilution C for HC 110. where the toe is more of a straight line like the straight line portion of the film curve which is about zone II through about zone IX. So lots of shadow detail. At 1:25 it behaves more like a traditional B&W film and developer combo (film curve)

Film is only one part of the equation. Matching it with the right developer is the other. For tonality this is a great combo. But remember rodinal is a true acutance developer. It will not soften the silver halide crystals thus showing more grain and the images will be very sharp.

Not an issue if shooting with large or medium format film but some do not like the appearance of more grain which will really become more apparent with smaller 135 format films. I never minded the grain.

When TMY-2 replaced TMY I was concerned if things were going to be different even mildly different. I didn't find that I had to change anything, but I didn't test I just shot and hoped. Quit soon after the changeover to TMY-2 Kodak had a podcast that basically said the film is just sharper nothing else has changed. As far as I can see that is correct. But again I haven't really tested.

 

[airfrogusmc]

When TMY-2 replaced TMY I was concerned if things were going to be different even mildly different. I didn't find that I had to change anything, but I didn't test I just shot and hoped. Quit soon after the changeover to TMY-2 Kodak had a podcast that basically said the film is just sharper nothing else has change. As far as I can see that is correct. But again I haven't really tested.

Thanks. Good to know. Then it should be really good with rodinal at 1:50. Especially with shadow detail. Lots of separation in the toe. (shadow detail).

 

[charjohncarter]

I've done exactly that (1+50). And hard to believe the apparent sharpness was as predicted: greater.

TMY-2 Rodinal 1+50 by John Carter, on Flickr

 

[airfrogusmc]

I always found tmax 400 with rodinal to be insanely sharp. I can only imagine how sharp the new tmax is. Thanks again....

 

[f16sunshine]

I used to use Tmax semi-exclusively for exposures rated iso 100-1600.
At the moment I have a freezer full of HP5 after a sale a few years ago (120). I'll be shooting Hp5 for now although Tmax400 is my preferred film still.

I found with Tmax developer 1:4 and adjusting agitations to keep from cooking highlights, the film held back as well as it pushed.
Rating down to 200 and up to 800 required no real changes in development.
Holding down to 100 required reduced time and careful gentle agitation.

Here a couple rated at 100 from a 2.8D. negative scans not wet print scans. (epson V700).
Untitled by Adnan, on Flickr

Ghosts of Summer by Adnan, on Flickr

And here is one at 1600 which you can see is a bit more blocked up from the poor light and from pushing..... not bad at all though. 6x12 with Nikon 75mm (epson V700)
tmax400@1600005 by Adnan, on Flickr

 

[Villanova]

@charjohncarter, @airfrogusmc

Thanks for chiming in. T-Max 400 looks beautiful. Nice detail, smooth transition along the spectrum. The sharpness is great too.

It's good to know that it handles Rodinal 1+50 too. I was thinking of switching to Rodinal to save on developing so that news is welcome.


@f16sunshine
Your scans look crisp and alive. Can you elaborate on your agitation method? I typically use Ilford DD-X with agitation every 25 seconds for 5 seconds (twice per minute).

 

[charjohncarter]

@charjohncarter, @airfrogusmc

Thanks for chiming in. T-Max 400 looks beautiful. Nice detail, smooth transition along the spectrum. The sharpness is great too.

It's good to know that it handles Rodinal 1+50 too. I was thinking of switching to Rodinal to save on developing so that news is welcome.


@f16sunshine
Your scans look crisp and alive. Can you elaborate on your agitation method? I typically use Ilford DD-X with agitation every 25 seconds for 5 seconds (twice per minute).

One thing I'm not sure I've ever used Tmax 400 with Rodinal 1+50 in 35mm. I do not like Rodinal with 35mm film because of increased grain. I'll check my photos and see if I have 35mm Tmax 400 with Rodiinal. Don't take my word for this, as I can't remember. But I do remember not using Rodinal with any 35mm film after grain problems.

EDIT: I did do a quick check and there was a increase of grain with Rodinal 1+50 and Tmax 400. But I'm picky so you may not care as it was slight.

 

[f16sunshine]

Can you elaborate on your agitation method? I typically use Ilford DD-X with agitation every 25 seconds for 5 seconds (twice per minute).

I have not used DD-X much sorry I have nothing to contribute there.

I agree with John about 35mm and Rodinal 1:50... Grain.
I like the grain but it's not why I use Tmax films.

When holding back a film I will usually note the highlights in order to try and keep them from scorching and loosing all detail. A high contrast scene will need adjusting. Lower contrast will not.
You can see the dried leaves on the sunflowers above are blown but, was able to hang onto some of the detail in other high areas that may otherwise have been blown.

The standard time and agitation for tmax400 when I use Tmax dev 1:4 is: 7mins at 20c, one minute inverting at the beginning and 3 inversions every minute until finished.

When holding back to 100, both development time and inversions are reduced.
The high areas exhaust the developer more quickly than the darker tones.
By not agitating, one is leaving exhausted developer on those higher zones and allowing the shadows to develop.
If we stayed with normal agitation, introducing "fresh" developer to those high areas would give them a chance to blow out
That's the theory to visualize anyway 🙂


For example: the sunflower was tmax dev 1:4 6mins at 20c.
Agitation for 1 minute and then 3 inversions at 4 minutes and 3 inversions at 2 minutes.
A less bright scene like the gate might only receive a reduced time and the normal inversion schedule (at every minute).
Develop a feel for it through trial and error.

More Traditional Zone system workers might be a better source for a lesson.
I'm far a purist 😱

By the expression this guy is making you can see he is a purist 😛 (120 tmax400 at 400 Rodinal 1:50)
Blaaaauucckkqqk!! by Adnan, on Flickr

 

[f16sunshine]

One other note on developing Tmax films.
It does require some extra fixing time.
There is a heavy purple tint to the films that require more time to remove.
Also, since I re-use max Dev 1:4 for several rolls, I also pre-soak the films in order to get rid of that purple as much as possible.
You will likely hear many opinions on pre-soaking or not pre-soaking.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I used TMY-2 for some time and it's an amazing film... Technically the best b&w film ever... I compared it in Rodinal and TMaxDev.
Both excellent. If you go that way, I remember how impressive it is @3200 in TMaxDev: sharp, crisp, tight grain, beautiful tone, close to classic grain film well pushed and metered... That's how I liked it the most... At 400, its tone is different from classic b&W film: it's clean, like digital color converted to b&w (think of most soft brides' shots for advertising).
Very sharp and detailed... Finally I returned to Tri-X and HP5+ for street, but of course TMY-2 is incredibly versatile and unsurpassed from every point of view.
J.

 

[charjohncarter]

One other note on developing Tmax films.
It does require some extra fixing time.

I remember my first roll of either TMX or TMY, I used my TriX fixing time. Luckily you can re-fix. Also I use EI of 200 for TMY-2; add that to my development scheme above.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

More fixing time AND it eats fixer... 🙂