Best developer for TMax100

I have processed 35mm TMax 100 in Rodinal 1:50 (superb sharpness, a little grainy), TMax Developer (Good sharpness, a little grainy), and Diafine (good sharpness, excessive grainess). Is there a developer which will preserve the superb sharpness and give finer grain than the Rodinal? Thanks

Try D-76/ID-11 1:3.

You might check out John Hicks' earlier post on Rodinal w/ sodium

ascorbate.

Bill, I love TMX and Xtol (stock). my favourite duo. silky smooth

though not as sharp as with Rodinal. TMY in Rodinal just doesn't come

close to Xtol, and I wanted a standardized developer for TMax films.

you might want to experiment with dilution, but my tests showed

little improvements in accutance and not worth enduring increased

processing times. report your findings.

Ilfosol-S 1:14.

After much fooling around with this, IMHO, the answer is no. I've

tried most of these things and was never satisfied for various

reasons. Rodinal gave the best tonal qualities and sharpness, but too

much grain. Xtol was really good at 1:3, but I had shelf life

problems with it (not the usual Xtol failures though). I haven't

tried Rodinal with sodium ascorbate, but wouldn't expect the degree

of improvement that it would take to fully solve the problem. I

suspect TMX isn't actually a fine grain film, but looks like one if

the grain is smooth. That would also explain the lack of edge

sharpness with most developers. I was actually questioning the

quality of all my lenses (and my sanity) until I started shooting

FP4+. There are many avenues to pursue (see Anchell & Troop's books,

plus some techniques advocated by John Sexton) but I found TMX to be

a tremendous time waster.

Try a catechol based developer, I use my own formula on TMX 4x5 and

it is great, also, ask Ted if he will sell you some of the formula he

is creating, he has gotten very nice low grain sharp negatives with

Catechol and tmx 35 mm, I have seen some of the prints and they are

very nice.....

 

<p>

 

As opposed to Conrad's experience I have found TMX in LF to be a

wonderful film, developed on catechol.

I like T-Max 100 in Rodinol 1:100, 20 minutes at 68 degrees, with

constant agitation the first two minutes, 5 seconds every minute

thereafter.

 

<p>

 

chris

I like Microphen 1+1 to 1+3 for TMX, because it makes reasonably sharp

images with good shadow separation even when I shoot at EI 100. The

grain is not as fine as with D-76H 1+1 or HC-110 1+15 from stock.

HC-110 1+15 makes very smooth, fine grain image which I don't like

much but sometimes useful. One thing I don't like about Microphen-TMX

combination is that it seems to compress midrange.

 

<p>

 

I'm surprised that no one so far suggested DK-50 or buffered FX-1 type

formulae. I'm still doing some experiments, and I'll post my formula

and time when my experiments are done.

Try TMax 100 in XTOL 1:1. I rate the film at EI 50. Very smooth grain

& excellent (apparent) sharpness at moderate to high magnifications

(11X14 prits from 35mm negs). As a matter of fact I found it

difficult to use my grain focuser because the grain edges were very

indistinct. The prints, however, have a smoothn roundness, almost 3

dimensional in quality.

Original flavor Kool-Aid diluted 1:50 with 5 parts sugar, j/k. I like

XTOL full strength or 1:3.

 

<p>

 

Cheerio

TMX has the potential for remarkable sharpness. But more than any

film I've tested, it reveals a developer's bias toward sharp grain

vs. soft grain; any tendency a developer has toward softening grain

will give an image that looks diffused. So the recommendations

you've gotten that achieve particularly sharp grain (Rodinal 1:100,

or Rodinal with sodium ascorbate, D-76 1:3, FX-1 or FX-2) will give

you the sharpness you are looking for.

 

<p>

 

Tanning developers are ideally suited to this end. I've only very

limited experience with TMX in PMK, but you might look for some

feedback with this combination. It should be a very sharp match.

 

<p>

 

I've used catechol based developers extensively with TMX and have

found nothing reveals as satisfying a combination of fine grain and

high sharpness. DiXactol, Pyrocat-HD, Jorge's catechol formula and

my own formula all work great with TMX. The great thing about

tanning/staining developers is the stain fills the gaps between grain

particles and smooths the tonality, thereby producing the high

acutance, etched look of Rodinal without the attendant graininess.

For the highest sharpness with fine grain, nothing I've ever seen

rivals a well formulated catechol or pyro developer.

 

<p>

 

With that said, however, if you want something less toxic and easier

to use, check out Pat Gainer's vit-c developers (see

unblinkingeye.com). I've found his formula the best non-tanning

developer for sharpness, fine grain and tonality. I've slightly

modified his formula so I can use it as an A+B type (which keeps

better and permits adjusting ratios for contrast control) as follows:

A - 8.0g ascorbic acid, 0.8g metol + 500ml distilled water; B - 6.8g

sodium hydroxide, 24.4g borox + 500ml distilled water (note: Pat has

told me he now uses 10% sodium metaborate as his B component.) I use

this developer 1:1:14 @ 70, TMX @ 11 min, Delta 100 9 min, Acros 10

min.

Thanks to everyone for taking the time and interest to answer. I'm

gonna give TechPan one more try, and if it doesn't work do the

Rodinal/Sodium Ascorbite and then the D-76/1+3 treatment. If that

doesn't work, I'm gonna sacrifice one of my last two rolls of Agfa

APX25.

Thanks again, Bill.

As Ted said, TMX has very high resolution, but very low apparent

sharpness if care is not taken. TMX has a thick hardened plain gelatin

layer covering emulsion, so it is hard to stain in tanning developers.

I think dedicated users of PMK and other tanning developing agents

generally prefer FP4+ and HP5+ among other non T-grain films. However,

I don't use tanning formulae in regular basis, I can't comment much on

it.

<p>

Again as Ted said, Gainer's Vitamin C formula is a good one for TMX.

I consider Gainer formula a drastically modified version of FX-1 or

FX-2. I've been using the following formula, which is also a

drastically modified version of buffered FX-1 or ascorbate version of

dilute DK-50 suggested in British Journal of Photography, as printed

in Anchell and Troop.

<p>

L-ascorbic acid 1.0g<br>

metol 0.4g<br>

sodium sulfite 20g<br>

sodium carbonate (monohydrate) 4.0g<br>

sodium bicarbonate 1.0g<br>

water to make 1.0 liter<br>

 

<p>

If you don't have any sodium carbonate, cook baking soda in an

enameled pot until the sticky feeling is lost, and use 3g of it

instead of 4g, as it is sodium carbonate in anhydrous form. So this

is pretty inexpensive and easy-to-make formula, although it's not as

cheap or simple as Gainer's.

 

<p>

I haven't tried, but in this formula, sodium ascorbate may be

substituted for ascorbic acid without much adjustment in processing

time because the developer is rather well buffered. I process TMX for

8.5 min to 9.0 min at 20C at EI 100.

 

<p>

With this formula, TMX gives much sharper images than in D-76Ad 1+1

but without undesirable grain or speed penalty. Shadow separation is

excellent, and tonal rendition is pretty good. I think this formula

has pretty good potential as a general purpose developer, but I

haven't tested much with APX25 or HP5+. Since this shouldn't be too

differnt from Ilfosol-S type formula, I also want to try this with

Delta 3200 at EI 1600, and with Delta 400 at EI 400 to 800. (inspired

by John Hicks' postings here a few weeks back)

 

<p>

My current notes are found at <a

href="http://rs.cncdsl.com/Photo-Tech/film-dev-combo.html>

film developer combination note</a>

and there's another note on more technical side. I haven't finished

the experiments yet, so they frequently get updated a bit.

Oh, sorry, my previous posting is screwed up. I have had too much wine

tonight. At least I'm not drinking metol solution :-)

<p>

My current notes are found at <a

href="http://rs.cncdsl.com/Photo-Tech/film-dev-combo.html">

film developer combination note</a>

and there's another note on more technical side. I haven't finished

the experiments yet, so they frequently get updated a bit.

Ilfosol-s 1+9 8mins@68deg F, film rated at 80 EI. If you can't get

good results out of Tmax100, then you've no chance with Techpan. Leave

the Technical pan to what it was intended for; high contrast copying.

I agree with Conrad Hoffman. I think T-Max is mostly a waste of

time. The best way to develop TMX is to develop Ilford Delta Pro 100

in XTOL.

I disagree with Bob and Conrad :-)

 

<p>

 

I made 11x14 from 6x6cm TMX neg (cropped) with two lenses. TMX was

developed in the developer described above. There's no visible grain

on the print, and I could BARELY see the grain in my grain focuser.

However, the prints clearly indicate the contrast difference of the

two lenses, one for Mamiya 6 and another for Mamiya TLR. They aren't

exactly at the same focal length, but Mamiya 6 lens was more contrasty

and crispy. I need a magnifier on print to tell the resolution

difference, but Mamiya 6 (50mm f/4) lens is superior. However, I like

the way bokeh comes out with Mamiya TLR lens (75mm f/2.8). Both were

shot at f/11. Again, these are not fair lens comparison, but I'm

saying that I can clearly see the difference of the lenses through

TMX, on the contrary to what Conrad said above. This difference is

hard to see if processed in D-76 1+1, and probably impossible to tell

if processed in HC-110!

Sorry, I can't comment abotu Rodinal - I never used it regularly.