Microdol and P3200

[zfgauthier]

I know this is an unusual combination and my prior research didn't come up with

too much, so I'd like to share my results. What I did was expose a roll of Kodak

Tmax P3200 at 800 and process it for 25 minutes in Microdool-X 1:3, 70F, five

inversions every 30 seconds. It worked. I actually think it worked really well,

but see for yourself. Below are some scans I made from the recently processed

negatives. They all have some light sharpening, but that's it.<br><br>Zenitar

16mm Fisheye<br><a

href="http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/1.jpg">http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/1.jpg</a>

 

<br><br>Pentax SMC-M 50/1.4<br><a

href="http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/3.jpg">http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/3.jpg</a>

 

<br><br>Zenitar 16mm Fisheye<br><a

href="http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/4.jpg">http://zack.loseby.net/images/radar/4.jpg</a>

 

<br><br><br>

As expected the grain is a little coarse, but I was really pleased with the

amount of shadow <i>and</i> highlight detail I got out of it. I hope these

examples are useful to somebody. Thanks for looking.

<br><br><br>

-Zack

[User_502260]

Your shadow detail comes from the fact taht you rated the film at 800. The true speed of the film is somewhere between 800 and 1200. By diluting the Microdol-X 1:3 you aren't losing speed as you would with undiluted Microdol-X. Most people who shoot this film develop it in a developer which contains phenidone. These would include DD-X, Microphen, T-MAX, X-tol, Acufine, UFG and others. Shooting the film at 1600 or 3200 and using a phenidoen based developer will not give the shadow detail you have but can be heplful in low light situations.