Andrew Touchon
Well-known
I have been experimenting using Xtol and T-Max developers to develop TMX and TMY film. Although my test is not complete, so far it appears that the Xtol is the best choice. The Xtol appears to give finer grain and better resolution of fine details. Also, the whites are whiter with Xtol. The T-Max has a grayish muddy look.
I was just wondering if others have had the same experience as I have.
I was just wondering if others have had the same experience as I have.
Nachkebia
Well-known
Well, I have not used X-tol but I have been experimenting with t-max and yeah it is grayish and muddy, but it works fine with slow speed films like delta.
P
plexi
Guest
If your tones are muddy with the T-Max, extend your development time.
Sounds like underdevelopment... That said, my experience with the T-Max developer is mainly with Tri-X 320, wich is a very good combination.
T-Max developer gives full film speed, and probably is slightly more grainer than XTOL, but I need the speed(I shoot a lot handheld with medium format)
Tri-X/T-Max example:
Sounds like underdevelopment... That said, my experience with the T-Max developer is mainly with Tri-X 320, wich is a very good combination.
T-Max developer gives full film speed, and probably is slightly more grainer than XTOL, but I need the speed(I shoot a lot handheld with medium format)
Tri-X/T-Max example:
Attachments
Nachkebia
Well-known
medium format is soooo smoooth, nice shot plexi
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
plexi said:
My negatives have high contrast and are definitely not underdeveloped. I think what I'm seeing is the more grain in the T-Max developed films, that gives whites a grayish look. Maybe my problem is overdevelopment?
P
plexi
Guest
Andrew Touchon said:
Okay,I think that T-Max dev shouldn`t be that much grainier, maybe T-Max dev and TMX/TMY isn`t a good combination? As I haven`t any experience besides the TXP/T-Max-combo, I can`t help you there.
But grain often is a result of both overexposure and overdevelopment, so...
As XTOL is cheaper in use, it sounds like an obvious choice for you.
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
plexi said:
Thanks for the info. Since "a picture is worth a thousand words,"I will try to post a couple of scans .
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
Andrew Touchon said:
The first one is TMX developed in T-Max. The second photo is TMX developed in Xtol. In both cases the same camera/Lens was used and the photos were taken within a hour of each other. In both cases the development procedures in the Kodak technical manual were followed.
Edit: Note the white stripes in the flag. Muddy looking in the first photo and bright white in the second photo.
Attachments
Last edited:
Michael I.
Well-known
I develop tmax 100 and 400(as well as 120 HP5 and plus x) in tetenal ultrafin liquid(not plus).while not intended for t grain it produces pleasant results.You can see some examples in my blog.
P
plexi
Guest
My observations are:
The T-Max-scan has at least a half stop more shadow detail, easily seen at the bush on the left side. So T-Max gives you the best film speed.
XTOL-scan seems finer grained and has more snap in the highlights.
As an experiment, if you have some T-Max developer left, try slightly longer development and maybe rate the film a little higher. You never know...
The T-Max-scan has at least a half stop more shadow detail, easily seen at the bush on the left side. So T-Max gives you the best film speed.
XTOL-scan seems finer grained and has more snap in the highlights.
As an experiment, if you have some T-Max developer left, try slightly longer development and maybe rate the film a little higher. You never know...
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
plexi said:
I shall keep on with my experiment and I will post the results. Thank you for your help.