TMX and TMY in Rodinal

[squareframe]

just a note to call attention to my stumbling upon a superb combination of TMX, TMY, and Rodinal. the 1:50 dilution yields a sharpness I haven't seen in my Xtol and ID-11 processes. I thought Xtol was outstanding for reduced grain, but apparently, this was from a solvent action that eroded my edge definitions. Rodinal 1:50, 12 minutes at 20C for TMX, 11 minutes at 20C for TMY, is the new reference. I rated TMX at EI50, TMY at EI200.

 

<p>

 

of all my film studies, this combination clearly yields something out of the ordinary.

[jorge_gasteazoro]

Daniel, you should have been reading this forum before. This is a

well known combination for many years, next you are going to try PMK

and REALLY see a beautiful negative! Good luck.

[squareframe]

I know there has been previous discussion about this combination.

there is also no shortage of TMax resistance, and after two years of

testing, I was very impressed with this discovery. just wanted to

sound the alarm so that newcomers may give it a try and post their

own observations. the cost is low, it has one-shot convenience,

relatively safe to use and dispose of, and yields marvelous results.

sounds like a winner to me.

[matt_veld1]

Daniel,

 

<p>

 

On your recommendation I'm going to give Rodinal a try. What sort of

agitation are you using? i.e. 30 seconds continuous and then 5

inversions per minute.

 

<p>

 

I would appreciate your help as I don't want to ruin another film

experimenting. I like TMY and have been using Xtol although it's

touchy stuff and Rodinal sounds like a better substitute. Can't buy

PMK where I live.

[squareframe]

Matt,

 

<p>

 

I hope those that have used this combination for a longer time will

chime in with what has worked. I am still fine-tuning this

combination, though it looks like TMX EI64, Rodinal 1:50, and

something less than 12 minutes (per Agfa). TMY EI250, Rodinal 1:50,

11 minutes at 20C. it will take a while to hone in on exact

processing parameters. I used Xtol as my main developer, but the

lingering fear of failure haunts me. important work warrants a less-

risky venture.

 

<p>

 

I profile my processing for best scanning. conventional enlarging may

require a different contrast-index. I seem to be one of the few that

continue to champion Kodak TMax films. have fun!

[squareframe]

didn't answer your question did I? I use the recommended agitation

per Agfa, which is basically what I have used for all my films except

for IR films. thirty second initial agitation, followed by a 5 second

agitation on thirty-second intervals.

[matt_veld1]

Daniel,

 

<p>

 

Thanks. I share your enthusiasm for TMax films and prefer them to the

Ilford Delta films although I haven't tried the new Delta 400 yet.

I've had a few failures with Xtol that I don't want to repeat.

[ed b.]

I give times for various films (including TMX and TMY) in Rodinal on

my site at <a

href=http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/Times_Rodinal/times_rodinal.html>http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/Times_Rodina

l/times_rodinal.html</a>.

[andy-]

Daniel, what format are you using? I posted a question regarding TMX

and Rodinal for use with 4x5 a while back. I've done some tests with

TMX and Rodinal (1:75)since then with a Jobo 2521 tank and nverting 5

sec. every minute at 68 deg. Although my results are VERY preliminary

I have to admit I'm disappointed. The tonal gradation is very nice

though it seems more compressed towards the shadows and a bit expanded

on the highlights. The real kicker though is a slight 'softness' and

in my opinion lack of overall acutance. As I mentioned in my previous

post my favorite combo for 4x5 B&W is Tri-X in HC-110 and while I made

the TMX negs I also exposed four sheet of Tri-X to use as a reference.

I should be able to print the Tri-X negs by the weekend. To be fair I

should wait to print the Tri-X negs before making any subjective

comparisons. Of course, TXT vs. TMX is comparing apples to oranges,

but it will be a very interesting from the point of view of the

'classic' emulsions vs. the T-Grain emulsions. Initially, though, I

find the TMX prints to be too 'soft' to my liking from 4x5 negs.

 

<p>

 

I'm curious, there must be a following of 4x5 TMX users out there,

what are your results, methods, what type of photography (landscape,

architecture) do you find best suits TMX? My main interest is in

landscapes, if you use TMX to good effect here I'd very much

appreciate your feedback.

[andy-]

Oops, that's Andy, not Any!

[frank_calidonna]

I think one reason for an apparent softness with TMX and Rodinol when

using a JOBO or other motorized processor is the continuous agitation.

Using Rodinol at high dilutions (1-75 or 1-100) agitate gently for

the first minute the five to ten seconds per minute, but do not touch

the tank between agitations. The edge effect that comes with Rodinol

will not happen with continuous agiation. Brief agitation and complete

rest between cycles in needed.

 

<p>

 

Frank

[fw1]

With respect, Daniel, I believe I gave you some times for <A

HREF="http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?

msg_id=003aIW">TMax in Rodinal 1:50</A>over a year ago.

<p>

Kind regards

[squareframe]

I think we tend to run in circles. many times I will re-discover

something that I had been fond of, just out of the desire to try

something new. TMX in Rodinal is indeed outstanding, but I have found

the grain is too excessive with TMY. in my attempts to find the *one*

do-all developer, I went back to Ilfosol S. I have a friend who soups

everything in HC110 and never varies. I use many film types, from TMX

to Kodak Aerographic 2424 infrared. it would be lovely to standardize

on one or two developers, but the engineer in me always peeks around

the corner for something just a little more golden. know what I mean?

the elusive Holy Grail .. which I thought was Xtol, till she let me

down too many times. like an old girlfriend of mine, when she was

good, she was very, very, good. when she was bad ....

 

<p>

 

the search continues ...

[fw1]

Yes, Daniel, I do much the same. TMax in Rodinal was my benchmark for

a long time, then I managed to find a source for PMK Pyro, in which

Delta 100 and Pan F+ seemed to do very well (but both films seemed to

have intermittent quality problems). Then I tried DiXactol with a

range of films, and most recently I have been using Fuji Acros 4x5

quickloads in PMK, which looks like a new benchmark.

[miguel_jiminez]

Daniel, I also love tmax films and also find that not many people

like tmy in all these forums. I have searched (in a very un-

scientific way) for some time for a good and easy developer choice

for it and I have ended where I started: tmax developer, but at 1+9

instead of 1+4, doubling standard reported times in the bottle. At

1+9 it keeps the beautiful look of the grain and increases apparent

acutance, which was my main problem. Rodinal gives too much grain for

tmy in my opinion, not a big issue with tmx where it works better I

think. Ilfosol-s gives a very rich tonality with both films, but

maybe too rich. Anyway, I have decided to stop searching and start

taking photos.

[dennis_paterson3]

TMX in FX-2 is amazing for very long-scale gradation with contrasty

light, royally rich silvery tones and "no grain", however acutance is

less than X-tol. As an all-rounder have you tried HP5+ in PMK, nice

mid-tone expansion, high acutance, good highlight seperation, etc.

(I've found Rodinal with TMX 120 had compressed and depressed mid-

tones, Rodinal-Special has "better" gradation, more like the

D76/Verichrome look). Anyone tried TMX in "Studional" ?