Tmax 100 at EI 3200-6400

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by mauro_franic, Aug 28, 2011.

  1. Very good results from pushing TMAX 100 5-6 stops.
    Developed in Xtol 1:1 80F 10.5 mins. Added 1-2 stops of exposure in PS.
    It is hard not to get good results with TMAX....
    Full Image:
  2. That is pretty nice grain for a 3200 exposure, but it also appears to be a well lit scene. Where I've had less success (abliet with Tri-X 400) at hi ISO's has been in really dark conditions. I'm always toying with b/w hi-ISO in smaller cameras to take out with me in the evening and haven't been very happy with my results so far.

    I haven't tried Xtol as a developer, is that your standard chemistry or was it chosen specifically for the push processing? Also what do you scan with?
    The lack of huge grain on this shot is really cool, thanks for sharing!
  3. Yes Xtol is my standard developer. Tmax doesn't show imo any grain - the little that can be seen is due to the sharpening for print.
    Dark conditions (with film or digital) are not a problem as long as you have contrast. If contrast is lacking, you need to spot meter the darkest area and push develop to spread the few stops in the scene across as many density levels in the negative as possible. The darkest area of the scene where the negative is thin is pretty much locked so you can push the lighter areas almost to your heart's content to make them denser on the film.
  4. In the picture above, to the naked eye the scene was very dark and I can only see the areas where the light glimmers. The scene was not revealed to me until I processed the negative.
  5. what was exposure time and aperture?
  6. It was 1/250 at f11.
  7. Reading excluding the sun was Ev 9 I think.
  8. 1/250 at f11? That seems like pretty bright light to me? Decent result for such a high ISO, though.
  9. Jedidiah, you may have a misconception. How you set your camera does not change the brightness of a scene. The scene metered at EV9.
    EV 9 is not bright. Daylight is EV 15 (64 times brighter than EV 9).
    You push process to compensate the difference between the ISO of the film and EI you shoot at to match the EV of the scene.
    To put it simply, 1/250 f11 was underexposed 5-6 stops as I was using ISO 100 film for an EV 9 scene. This is because 1/250-f11-ISO 100 would expose correctly a scene with EV 15 (not 9).
  10. Ah, I didn't realize the "1/250 at f11" was after you pushed it to ISO 3200+. That is indeed a low light scene then. Thanks for explaining that.
  11. hmmm... Not sure I understand - 1/250 f11 is set on the camera - pushing is on the film (after the shot). But yes it was dark.
    What most noticeable for me is that the film retained some detail in the back under the trees with the light blocked and contralight from the sun. There was probably barely any light or contrast there.
  12. In your opinion Mauro, what would give better result: T-Max 100 pushed 5 stops or T-Max 3200 (or Ilford Delta 3200)? How would you compare those emulsions with respect to high ISO?
  13. They are very different.
    Tmax 3200 retains gradation and dynamic range better then Tmax 400 pushed 3 stops or Tmax 100 pushed 5 stops.
    Tmax 100 EI+5 has finer grain than Tmax 400+3, which has finer grain than Tmax 3200.
    Tmax 100 EI+5 has higher contrast than Tmax 400+3, which has higher contrast than Tmax 3200.
  14. If you want to retain more midtones gradation or lower contrast go with 3,200. If you want finer grain and more resolution go with Tmax 100 as long as high contrast and shorter DR don't come in your way.
  15. Dear God. I knew film was good... but... this... Less noise than a Nikon D700 at 6400!
    Actually, I have a D700 and it's great. It's still better than the D7000 at high ISO. And besides, this is b&w - Portra isn't quite as good at EI 6400 as far as I've seen.
    BTW did you get my private message? It isn't very important anyway.
    EDIT: While everyone (including me) will celebrate the D700's successor, film will be doing the thing it has always done, without fanfare.
  16. I'll check my email now.
  17. It’s interesting... Thanks for sharing. I was surprised how fine the grain is when I reviewed the full size. But in terms of retaining details in dark areas it doesn’t look bad at all. Did you use any filter? Yellow, Orange?
  18. No filters.
    As a rule of thumb you loose one stop of DR for every stop you push. (Since your shadows are locked but you are stretching the midtones and highlights into denser areas of the film).
  19. E.g: Since TMax 100 on Xtol 1:1 at EI100 has about 16 stops. At EI 6400 (pushed 6 stops) it will have around 10 stops of DR, it will be contrastier, and have slightly larger and more defined grain (due to the larger more light sensitive cluster's now occupying more -and denser- areas of the film).
  20. Karim, carrying my Mamiya 7II with TMAX 100 and the 80mm lens, works not only as an ISO 100-6400 system but also as a built in 35-200mm zoom for most print sizes.
  21. Mauro, the photo in your OP was a 35mm shot, right? If so, the quality at 6x7 would be astounding considering the EI.
  22. I took this photo with an Olympus RC35. I also took it with a Mamiya 7II.
    Yes, the 6x7 shot is outstanding as well as the 35mm shot.
    With the 6x7 shot I am printing a commissioned 38x60 canvas.
  23. Sorry, Mauro, I should have been more specific. Is the image you linked to (5448 x 3543, 9000ED) a scan of a 35mm frame? I assume so, given the aspect ratio.
    Further, what would happen if you do not push and just rate at EI 6400? Would the image actually be unusable?
  24. Yes. If you didn't push it would be less contrasty, have higher DR and slightly smaller grain.
    Judging by the tones - here is an example of film that is either not pushed or pushed just 1 stop. (look at the tones at x3 and then original size).
    Here you can check a bunch of TMAX shots (35mm and 6x7 - or crops) shot with Tmax 100 or Tmax 400. Most are pushed 1, 2 or 3 stops but I don't have notes on them.
    (I can only upload crops from 6x7 on smugmug because it doesn't support 90 megapixel files).
  25. Here are similar shots of the train pushed only a couple stops (about 9 minutes).
    Here with 35mm:
    Here with MF:
  26. I have some quick observations:
    1. The un-pushed T-Max can be made more contrasty simply by either using an appropriate grade of paper or adjustments in software.
    2. The reflections off the train tracks were very strong in the pushed T-Max but not as strong in the un-pushed T-Max. Conclusion: pushed film increases risk of overblown highlights.
    Am I right? In any case, I am still impressed that you can underexpose T-Max by that much and have a very usable image. I think that in the rush to digital in the last decade, very sloppy comparative analysis was being presented to us. It is like engineers saying that metal is obsolete because now we have carbon fibre!
  27. Correct on all accounts.
    The film that was pushed 5-6 stops definitely get contrastier and gives up some dynamic range. (Still, the DR is very high though).
    Increasing contrast in PS is effective but you are basically stretching thinner areas of the negative more digitally. The results is lower gradation and more blocked dark areas. Both approaches work well combined.

Share This Page