tmz3200 in 510-pyro

[wang]

I developed a expired tmz3200 in 510-pyro, and result is surprise.

 

I shot the film at 800, since it's expired more than 2 years and no freezing

storage.

 

I developed it in 510-pyro, 1:100 70F 8min( as same as D-76 stock data) followed

Jay's advice.

 

Base fog, yes, there is fog. I don't see the edge of the image on film when I

squeeze the water off.

 

But the scanned image is surprise. It's actually good for this kind of speedy

film. And grain is NO more than 400 film in rodinal. few picture is about the

same as 100 film in rodinal 1:50 ! And AGAIN 510-pyro eased the contrast, much

less block out then normal developed speedy film.

 

See some samples:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23871836@N00/sets/72157594371055271/detail/

 

look at IMG22001 in the set, it just about the same as 100 film.

 

I remember I saw someone developed HIE in pyro and get excellent result, so I

think pyro in general is a saver for speedy film, I would imagine that a current

3200 film developed in 510-pyro would be very good. Hope some one could try it

out, or I will do it when I find one.(I am a second hander in photography, even

for films, too much cost..).

[al_divenuti]

Thanks for posting the results.

 

Pretty good tonality for TMZ, I must say. And the grain is indeed fine and tight.

 

TMZ is really made to be exposed at EI 1250 - 3200 (though it's true speed is about ISO 800). I would not have expected very good results at EI 800, but these are very good.

[jay_de_fehr]

Hi Wang.

 

Your images look very good. Fast, expired film is a worst case scenario for a staining developer, so I'm glad to see that 510-Pyro handled it so well. That's very fine grain for an EI 800 film, and good gradation. I've seen much coarser grain with 400 speed films. I've never tried TMZ/510-Pyro, but your results have encouraged me to give it a try. Thanks for posting.

 

Jay

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

The thing I find is that 510-pyro isn't that great for pushing 400 speed film to 1600. Development times are very long, the shadow speed increase isn't that good compared to Microphen. Base fog seems bad as well (I guess due to very long development times). Maybe I am doing something wrong. It surely would be great to have one developer for everything. Normal exposure and pushing.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

"I would not have expected very good results at EI 800, but these are very good."

 

If the film's speed is around 800, why wouldn't you expect good results?

[mike_barger]

it is a 3200 speed film under exposed 2 stops.

[jay_de_fehr]

Dan,

 

I've been thinking about pushing with 510-Pyro, and why it might not be a good choice. I've been reviewing my test data, looking at 510-Pyro curves, and equivalent densities over different development times, trying to see if I can identify potential problems with push processing. What I've been able to see, so far, is that 510-Pyro doesn't shoulder at 1:100 with rotary development; more development produces more contrast, until the film runs out of latitude, or shoulders, at very high densities. One problem is the stain, which builds with oxidation, so that the longer the film develops, the more stain density forms, and with 510-Pyro the stain is very proportional, meaning more in the highlights, less in the shadows; the opposite of what a good push developer should do. Even in dilute solutions, stain density is heavy and proportional, and there is no compensating effect, ie, the curve retains its shape. One potential avenue of investigation for push processing with 510-Pyro might be to add enough sulfite to kill the stain, in combination with a dilute solution and reduced agitation. While this might reduce the highlight densities in proportion to the shadow densities (reduce contrast), I suspect that 510-Pyro is robust enough that it won't exhaust in the highlights enough to create a compensating effect, and the absence of stain might increase apparent grain. I don't know, this is all pure speculation, as I haven't tested 510-Pyro with sulfite. 1 gram of sulfite/ml of 510-Pyro concentrate should be enough to kill the stain, if you're interested in following this line of investigation. I'll play around with it later tonight and let you know what I learn, if anything. Thanks for posting.

 

Jay

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Not sure I want to add sulfite. Isn't the lack of sulfite one of the major features. Why not use PC-TEA instead then. I thought I would switch from PC-TEA to 510-pyro, but neither really work well for pushing. So now I am down to 510-pyro for normally esposed films, and Microphen for pushed films, or when I just don't have the patience and must develop in under 10 minutes. Thanks for testing though!

 

I should mention non-stain issues with PC-TEA as far as pushing is concerned. It just doesn't do as well as other developers, which shouldn't be a surprise I guess. Highlights do not compensate. It is very tempting to just have one developer for all my needs though :).

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

"it is a 3200 speed film under exposed 2 stops."

 

I am confused!

[jay_de_fehr]

Hi Dan.

 

I don't know whether killing the stain would help in push processing, or not, but if it did, it only takes about .5g-1g of sulfite/ml of concentrate to do the job, which would mean about 5-10g of sulfite/liter of 1:100 working solution, and I don't know how much impact that might have on grain/sharpness. If it worked, it might be easier to keep some sulfite around than to keep a separate developer, which doesn't enjoy the same long shelf life that 510-Pyro does. I should say that I'm fairly skeptical that the strategy would work, so this is probably all academic anyway.

On another tack, why not use Microphen for all your negs? If you do a lot of pushing, and you like the results you get with Microphen, it wouldn't have to sit on your shelf as long if you used it for all your negs.

 

I think Mike meant that it is a 3200 speed film 2 stops OVERexposed, which might not guarantee the best results.

 

Jay

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

"On another tack, why not use Microphen for all your negs? If you do a lot of pushing, and you like the results you get with Microphen, it wouldn't have to sit on your shelf as long if you used it for all your negs."

 

Because now that I've seen the advantages of the pyro developer, I'll want to use it as my general purpose developer when I care about finenness of grain, sharpness, etc.

 

By the way, what's your experience with Neopan 1600 with it? Thanks.

[thomas_sullivan]

well, as Dan knows I may develop my own film but i stay strictly with prepared developers. Never had the desire to mess with indevidual chemicals to alter characteristics, so I have no clue what Dan and Jay are talking about above....

 

....but on the subject of pushing with Pyro......PMK Pyro in my case........I tried it. It's not a good thing at all. Without true technical analysis, my immediate thoughts on the results were that it lost a lot of it's nice fine gradation of mid gray to white in the process. Very blocked whites to boot, and even had what i can only call a "chalky" look to it. I believe it was HP5+ at 1250, and used the "staining" step also.....been about 3 years since I messed with it...never tried it again.

 

Now, 120 Delta 3200@1250 in PMK Pyro is the cat's meow in my book. Never tried it in 35mm, so I'm not real sure what the grain is like....but in 120, it's basically not there.

[jay_de_fehr]

Hi Dan.

 

I get really nice results from Fuji 1600 EI 1600/510-Pyro 1:100/ 7:00/70F. I'll scan some examples when I get time. I think this is a really good option for low light work in this range.

 

Jay

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Jay: thanks, I'll try that.

 

Thom: thanks; Delta at 1250 should look good in any developer, because that's its native speed. If I want to pay extra for Delta 3200, it's for shooting it at 3200 or at least 1600. Of course other than exorbitantly long development times at 3200, another big problem with this film is the retailers don't store it cold, and the base fog is a problem.

 

So far my experience with Delta 3200 at 3200 and 6400 has been pretty bad with Microphen. Horrible grain. You don't even need a loupe to see it. On the other hand, at around 1200 in IIRC dilute Xtol was great! Grain wasn't huge and lumpy like in Microphen, but very, very sharp, and small enough for an 11x14 print. The print looks great tonally as well.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

And that was from 35mm negative!

[mike_barger]

Sorry Dan, I did write it backwards. Thanks Jay for correcting it.

 

Mike

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Here's a shot from a roll I shot this Friday. Neopan 1600. I decided to develop to a very high contrast, as some of the shots were taken in very flat, very low light. Some shots were taken in contrasty low light, some were taken with flash! What's immediately obvious when scaning is ridiculously high base fog. Developed at 1:50, 12 minutes.<div></div>

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

another from that roll<div></div>

[thomas_sullivan]

the only reason I went for Delta 3200 at it's real iso was because the choices of high speed film in Medium Format are limitted. I've use Tri-X at 1600 in acufine and it was good, but when I learned that Ilford's delta 3200 was slightly low contrast.......and plus the better tonal gradation of pyro in the upper zones, I thought they might prove an alternative to the typical increase in contrast of a pushed film. That's what I actually like about that combo the best. The nice even tones at a high speed, and not to mention Medium Format's tendancy to better tonal gradation, makes it a great choice for low light photography where there are lots of lights and deep shadows.......like street usually is.

 

Now, if you want really high speeds.........try 120 Tri-X @ 6400 in HC-110 REPLENISHER. Contrast is off the wall...and for medium format, so is the grain......but, it overcomes those typical slow lenses of MF very nicely.

 

just my opinion of what I've tried.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

and another

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

foggy<div></div>

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Thomas: here's a shot from a medium format camera, at f/4 HP5+ pushed to 1600 or maybe 3200. Shot probably closer to 1000-1250. I like to experiment.<div></div>

[thomas_sullivan]

whats up with this forum...........it wouldn't let me post images

[thomas_sullivan]

i'll try it the other way......................<a href="http://tssullivan.net/images/01gct3.jpg"><u>first one is Mamiya C220, delta 3200 at 1250 pmk pyro</u></a>..........<a href="http://tssullivan.net/images/34th8th.jpg"><u>second is Holga, tri-x at 6400, HC-110 replenisher</u></a>...........heh...........yeah, I like to experiment too.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

I like the Delta pic, but again the base fog sucks there too.