Pushing Tmax 100 to 400?

[peter_kim2]

I had an accident today which turns out to be actually fortuitous

since I can ask this question on photo.net! I always hated the look

of the grain on Tmax 400. Well today I was testing out an old Canon

FX SLR of mine that I found tucked away in the basement (camera

circa 1960s) I also wanted to test out a lightly dusty Canon f/1.8

50mm on it. I accidently exposed my Tmax 100 at 400,

effectivly 'pushing' it to 400.

 

Ive always wondered how Tmax 100 would look at 400 as opposed to

real Tmax 400 at 400. I'm thinking about developing this in straight

D-76 (since thats all I have on hand) and the massive development

chart reccomends 11 minutes at 20 degrees C.

 

Since I wont be able to get to a darkroom to print it up anytime

soon I was wondering what everyone's experiences are pushing Tmax

100 to 400. I shot most of it around f/8 and 125 on a moderatly

bright day (about 2 hours before sunset).

 

Looking forward to everyones experiences!

[steve_levine]

In the future if you want to shoot 100 at 400,push it 1 stop only and use T Max developer.(as per Kodak's website)

[m0002a]

Since you used it on a moderately bright day, it's going to be a bit under-exposed in the shadow areas, or a bit contrasty (with the extra development), or both.

[lex_jenkins]

If the roll is important put it in the fridge and order some Diafine. Maybe cut the roll in half and do tests with Diafine and another speed developer.

 

In my area Microphen and Acufine are fairly readily available and may do the trick. I've recently souped three rolls of TMY (T-Max 400) at 1250-1600 in straight Microphen in light ranging from full sun to dim indoors to stage lighting. Microphen appears to compress the tonal range just enough to make printable negs from most frames. So it might do the trick for TMX as well.

 

I wouldn't recommend D-76/ID-11. I've tried it as stock solution and various dilutions as a push developer and haven't had the same good results I've had with Microphen. Base fog is higher, grain is harsher and clumpier.

[andrew_hull]

Peter:

 

I actually rate TMAX 100 and have gotten very good negatives from it, not just "printable", but very good looking negatives. Diafine is really easy to use and the prints with TMAX 100 are VERY sharp.

[gareth_harper]

Don't understand the problem with Tmax 400 grain. I shoot a lot of this stuff, I find the grain very fine for a 400 speed film, it's sharp and delivers an endless spread of tones.

I develope it in Ilfosol S.

[peter_kim2]

Actually I think you may have misunderstood myt question. I exposed it from 100 to 400 (pushed it) by accident. I was just curious as to what people who did it intentionally, thought of the results; since I dont like Tmax 400.

 

As for 400, I (and I suspect most people who dislike it) arent saying it is too grainy. It is quite sharp compared to other 400 films. But I and others dont like 'the look' of the grain. Its a matter of taste I supose but Ive noticed a lot of others dont like Tmax 400 either.

[lex_jenkins]

Peter, I know what you mean about the grain structure of TMY (T-Max 400). At nominal speeds and with developers like ID-11 and Rodinal the grain of 35mm TMY is not aesthetically appealing.

 

However I have an 11x14 print from Kevin Bourque done with 4x5 TMY that has remarkable detail, tonality and absence of grain. Dunno what developer he used.

 

FWIW, TMY pushed to 1250-1600 in Microphen 1:0 gives very good results and the grain is less objectionable. Naturally I expect grain from such a push so my expectations are lower - but the results really are pretty remarkable.

[gareth_harper]

Yeah I understood the question Peter, I was just piscking up on that 'don't like Tmax400' thing.

I've never noticed anything ugly about Tmax400 grain, and to be honest it's so fine at 400asa that unless you are doing really big prints you shouldn't even see it. Prints should be looked at, not examined in minute detail, well that's my take anyway.

I also reckon that if you don't like Tmax400, there must be another 400 film you could or would like. I've got doubts, accidents aside of course, that pushing 100asa film two stops is the long term answer.

Developers will play their part in this, Rodinal I remember reading in B&W photogrpaher (can't remember the chaps name) is not the right type of deveoper for Tmax. I used Ilfosol S from the start, it was there on the shelf in the shop, I like the results and I've stuck with it. I've been itching to try this Rodinal stuff so I bought some tri-x for it, shot a few rolls and again I'm happy with the results. I found it much more contrasty than Tmax but still with a good spread of tones, much more dark and broody looking.

Difficult to describe the different looks, but I guess Tmax is the kind of film you might grab for a wedding shoot, while tri-x has that classic hard reportage look.