35mm TMAX goes to the beach

[mauro_franic]

<p>Mind blowing DR.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Brutal tonal gradation.</p><div></div>

[starvy]

<p>it seems to have very fine grain. what speed was this?</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>100 and 400. I will post the full size for you as well.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Deep midrange contrast.</p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Crisp bookeh capture.</p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>100% Scans here:<br>

http://shutterclick.smugmug.com/gallery/8072306_QeWRb#525850601_ansHS</p>

 

[larrydressler]

<p>You should see it in 120 Those are great. I wonder if Kodak will update the TMX like they did the TMY? the New TMY is almost as fine as the TMX is.</p>

[patrick_mont]

<p>Great depth!</p>

[stephen sullivan]

<p>Mauro, amazing shots. Question, did you use any contrast filters* or just a UV?</p>

<p>* Green - Yellow - Orange - Red - or perhaps a Cir-PL?</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Stephen, just UV to keep the salty air/mist off the lens. </p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Larry, Kodak updated the 100 a year earlier. The new 400 is very close but not quite as fine to 100. Both sharp enough to outresolve any lens.</p>

<p>The new 400 has also (in my opinion) a very attractive and improved tone rendition from the old TMY.</p>

<p>On 120 both are just unreal. I almost brought the RZ to the beach but I'm to attached to bring it on the sand. The Elan 7ne with the 50mm 1.4 got 99% of the shots. </p>

<p>Both TMAX 100 and 400 are plenty for 24 inch prints from 35mm. 120 is just heaven.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>I will scan a few more tonight. I tried to really put the film to the test to the widest DR scenes I found.</p>

[george_pentzikis1]

<p>Would you care to share developement details ?</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>For TMX 100: Xtol 55:45, 75F, 6.5 min, (30 sec continuous and the 5 inversions and a tap every 30 sec)<br /> For TMX 400: Xtol 1:1, 75F, 7 min, (30 sec continuous and the 4 inversions and a 2 taps every 30 sec)</p>

<p>For TMX 400 at 6400 I use 10.5 minutes.</p>

[drjedsmith]

<p>Mauro,<br>

Thanks for sharing those. I don't remember getting such good tonal gradations out of Tmax when I used to try it. I always went back to the old-school Plus-X and Tri-X for that reason.<br>

But, your results may make me change my mind! :-) I'll have to try some with those development times and see what I get someday.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Jed</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>What developer were you using?</p>

<p>TMAX and Xtol for me produce the best results of all film/developer combos I tried in the last 15 years. TMAX developer gives wider DR but larger grain when compared to XTOL.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Here is a reference by Kodak that matches my results:</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[scrivyscriv]

<p>Absolutely wicked technique! Love it!</p>

[robertfarnham]

<p>For insane detail, try it in large format!!<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/3982308 (This is TMY, poorly scanned, with horrific development technique..mine. TMX gives even more.)</p>

<p>Great shots.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Here you can compare how TMAX 400 (in this case shot at 800) is more contrasty than TMAX 100.</p>

<p>TMAX 400 (800):</p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>TMAX 100:</p><div></div>

[alex_sokoloff2]

<p>So.... my only experience with Tmax films dates back to the early 90s - at the time I worked at a pro black and white lab, and all of us who printed for a living hated and avoided these films because of their blown out highlights and lots of tedious burning in that came with it. I finally ran tests of all of the various emulsions available at the time and measured the results with a densitometer. The tmax films (100, 400, and 3200) had ski-jump shaped characteristic curves, with the densities taking off in the highlights. Yuck! Most of the other brands had fairly straight characteristic curves with a noticable shoulder in the extreme highlights. One film, I believe Fuji Neopan 1600, was the anti-Tmax, actually compressing tones in the highlights, making it amazing for use with backlit subjects.<br>

Has Kodak reformulated the tmax films in the last 15 years to have more benign tonal curves? Judging by the reults above, it appears they have, although with digitizing and tonal manipulation in photoshop, the old emulsions would probably have proven more tractable - for optical printing they were a nightmare.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Alex, what developer and temperature were you using in the lab to blow out the highlights on TMAX?</p>

[drjedsmith]

<p>Yes, Kodak reformulated the Tmax films, and I believe more than once. At least the 400 speed considerably, and pretty recently too. I sure these films are different animals now than the ones you had experience with in the '90s.<br>

@Mauro - I was generally using D76, and I was printing optically in my garage - not the best "controlled" darkroom conditions, etc...but it worked. At any rate, I kept going back to Plus-X and Tri-X as my favorite, I just seemed to get more tones or something that I liked from the old emulsions.<br>

Like I said earlier, though - your results have made me want to revisit this some time.<br>

Jed</p>