Jump to content

christer_almqvist2

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    316

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by christer_almqvist2

    When do you use Tmax-100 (Tmx) vs. Tmax-400 (Tmy-2)

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>With regard to 35mm:<br>

    - grain: the difference between TMX and TMY is clearly visible when enlarged 12x or more<br>

    - resolution: no big difference<br>

    - acutance: no big difference<br>

    - speed: evidently different<br>

    So it boils down to either high speed or (almost) no grain. <br>

    You cant have both in 35mm if you do large prints like 30x40cm (12x16 inches) with some cropping.</p>

    Finally took the big plunge

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>John-Paul:<br>

    TMAX developer is very good for TMY2 and easily available.<br>

    -----<br>

    Now my questions:<br>

    Why use so many different films?<br>

    Why presoak?<br>

    Why no stop bath? (This is film, not paper.)<br>

    Why perma wash?<br>

    Why wash 30 mins when 5x water change plus agitation will suffice?<br>

    How do you know the negatives came out well if you have not printed them?</p>

    <p>;-))</p>

    Kodak T-MAX developer: why so disliked in forums?

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>Thank you all for your comments and responses!</p>

    <p>A few years ago one could buy TMAX developer in two-packs; each bottle containing (I believe 250ml). The selling point was that this way you could be sure to use fresh developer. I took this to mean that the keeping properties of the developer was not that outstanding once the bottle had been opened.</p>

    <p>Now the smallest size in Europe is the one litre bottle and the Kodak says: "You can store working-strength solution in a full, tightly closed bottle for six months, in a half-filled bottle for two months, or in a covered tank for one month. You can store the concentrate for up to two years."</p>

    <p>I am sure there is some safety margin built into these figures. Has TMAX developer been reformulated recently or was I misreading the message from the 250 ml bottles?</p>

    Kodak T-MAX developer: why so disliked in forums?

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>It is always the same story being told: not made for T-MAX films (what then for?), the name is a misnomer. Hardly anybody has something good to say about it. Are people just repeating what the have read, or have they run some test themselves?</p>

    <p>OK, it expensive, but then it is liquid, and that is convenient. OK, it is said to be best at 24°C and that may be inconvenient is some locations (but an an advantage in other).</p>

    <p>I have just tested it with both TMX and TMY and I am very satisfied, especially as I like to shoot at twice the box speed. I am shooting 35 mm and my standard paper sizes are 24x30 cm (roughly 10x12 inches) and 30x40cm, both with about 3/4 inch margins all around which means that I enlarge 12-14 times.</p>

    <p>My testing is the result of my effort to simplify my photo hobby and use only one developer and two films, or one film and two developers.</p>

    <p>Looking forward to hearing what your experience has been with the TMAX developer for 35mm film.</p>

    <p> </p>

    Tri-X shot with M6 in Venice, what developer?

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>If somebody who asks for information on what developer to use considers it relevant to provide information on what camera was used and where, but says nothing about e.g. the light conditions or the subjects, then I think that it is very likely that the responses will be wasted.</p>

    <p>I liked the following comment on another forum, the question being: Which of these lenses (long list attached) should I bring for my next trip to Paris ? The comment was: All these lenses are unsuitable for Paris, however the are all just like made for Madrid.</p>

    <p>I hope that the person who asked got the point, but now, I am no longer sure ;-)</p>

    <p>BTW, what lens(es) was/were used in Venice?</p>

    Tri-X shot with M6 in Venice, what developer?

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>Whatever developer and time and agitation you decide upon - expose another film and test develop it before risking your Venice films.</p>

    <p>And frankly: if you have to ask question like this, then it does not matter which of the common developers you use. You won't see any difference. Or it will be six of one and half a dozen of the other for you.</p>

    Pushing 100 or pulling 400 film to get e.i. 200?

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>

    <p >Pushing 100 or pulling 400 film to get e.i. 200?</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >This was not really the question I posed to myself, but it was a step on the way to get the answer to my original question: "Can I cut down my current number of film/developer combinations from more than a dozen to just two without loss of quality?"</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >I was thinking of using just one film with two developers or two films with just one developer.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >Just in case you are curious, the films I used in the recent past were Delta 100 and HP5+ from Ilford and TMX and TMY from Kodak. My developers included Rodinal, Xtol, Spur SD2525 and Rollei RLS Low Speed Developer</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >The only film I really liked in Rodinal was HP5+ with its nice, sharp grain. The only film I found useful in Rollei was TMX; for the others the disadvantage of the film speed loss was greater than the advantage of the finer grain. </p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >So I decided to test pulled TMY in Rollei RLS and TMX pushed in Xtol 1+1 or Spur SD2525 as my e.i. 200 combination.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >I already had tested out development times for these three combinations for an e.i. of 200, but when I shot the new test series I included a row of nine grey card exposures (Zones 1 through 9). The measured densities for all three films were very close and never more than one-sixth of a f-stop different.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >Resolution test were made using an USAF chart. I do not wish to state any absolute figures, but all test were made under similar conditions so the values are comparable. I made 14x enlargements and looked at them with an excellent loupe. Very similar impressions for all three combinations with Xtol and SD2525 sharing first place and Rollei one chart step behind.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >These prints also allowed a look at the grain structure. Xtol showed most grain and Rollei the least, again with very small differences between the three. Using no loupe, the Xtol print looked a bit muddier that the other.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >The proof of the pudding is in the eating and having compared real life, (in this case still life) pictures enlarged 14 times, the verdict is clear</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >TMY in Rollei is the winner: smoothest grain, yet sharp looking and with excellent grey values.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >TMX in SD2525 is the runner up, slightly more grain but very sharp.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >TMX in Xtol shows more grain than the other two and is lacking acutance.</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >---</p>

    <p > </p>

    <p >I have been quite pleased with TMY2 exposed at 800 and developed in Xtol 1+1 in the past, but I shall now see if I get results I like more using Kodak T-Max developer.</p>

    </p>

    Developing tank leak

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>My tanks leak too. Not much, just a few drops, but annoying. I do not want to get my fingers exposed to chemicals. </p>

    <p>My solution: a bit of kitchen paper around the cover (to absorb the liquid), a small plastic bag upside down over the top (to avoid contact with the wet paper) and a rubber band around the bag to keep it all in place.</p>

    Pushing TMAX-400

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>If you have access to The Darkroom Cookbook (steve anchell) to which you referred above, then you will see at the back of the book the time increases needed for pushing. For Xtol diluted 1+1 it is more or less 10% for one stop push and 20-25% for two stops.</p>

    <p>You can not develop in an opaque jar as the film will stick together which will prevent developer reaching all parts of the film and the film will be glued together as gelatine is a very good glue.</p>

    <p>You can not stand develop 35mm in a tray for more or less the same reasons as above.</p>

    Pushing TMAX-400

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>How much you can push TMX and TMY depends on your taste and the subject. I a jazz club you can push TMY to 1600 because there are no details in the shadows that you will miss on the final print. If you photograph a landscape you will probabbly want to have details everywhere and then pushing is not a good solution. Personally I always push, but seldom more than one stop.</p>

    <p>The amount of pushing also depends on the developer. D76 should be OK for a bit of pushing. Xtol will be better.</p>

    <p>Stand processing can be done in a tank, stand just means that you do not agitate, or that you agitate very little. Are you developing 35mm, or medium format, or even sheet film? Recommendations relating to physical handling of the film while developing will depend on what type of film you use.</p>

    stick agitator in paterson system 4

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>I do not use the stick for development, but I use it for stop and fix. The latter two are processes that need to be 100 per cent complete. Overstop and overfix are theoretically possible, in practice not. Development is different, over development will impair the quality of the negatives</p>

    <p>I have made a stick test. Shot a whole 36 exposure 35 mm film, grey card and all shots identically exposed. Then I developed using the stick to agitate, 30 secs initiially, then 4 turns every full minute. I measured the densities at the beginning of the film (located near the centre of reel when developing) and at the end of the film (located near the outside of reel when developing). The densities at the end of the film were so much higher than those at the beginning of the film that I stopped using the stick to agitate during development.</p>

    <p>The reason for the difference in densities is of course that the portion of the film near the centre moves much less than the portion of the film away from the centre.</p>

    Insane and lovin it...

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>On a six week trip to Paris two years ago I took my developing tank with me and a liquid developer with which I was very familiar. I bought hypo locally. I loaded the tank at night using my coat as a changing bag (closed all buttons and the zip, put film and tank inside coat, folded bottom part twice and used clothes pegs to keep it folded; put my hands through the arms of the coat and loaded the reel). Very unproblematic. The main thing is to use a developer you are familiar with.</p>

    <p>In case you overread it: The main thing is to use a developer you are familiar with.</p>

    <p>I put the developed films in the usual sleeves, which I had also brought along (difficult to find these days, unless you want to change brands), and checked them with a loupe. I am glad I did, because I encountered a few situations where I wanted to reshoot - and was able to do so.</p>

    <p>It is not a pain in the neck to develop on the road. I find it very worthwhile</p>

    Rodinal 1+50 in a 1 reel Patterson System 4 tank

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>I can only confirm what Amir said, 3 ml Rodinal per film is sufficient.</p>

    <p>I talked to Mr Scotland at the Agfa lab people in Leverkusen some ten years ago and he said that 5 ml was absolutely adequate and that less would generally do nicely too, but that Agfa would just never officially say so in order to avoid any possible trouble.</p>

    <p>I have been down to 1+150 using 2 ml in a Paterson 290 ml tank and I measured the negatives ( nine zone system exposures of grey card ) and they showed no weakness compared to other dilutions.</p>

    Cleaning plastic reels

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>If you don't use photo-flo et al (why should you???) and wash your films while still on the reel, there is absolutely no need for any reels-only wash.</p>

    <p>Use de-min water for the last wash and dry the film with a folded paper kitchen towel once it hangs and you have no problems with residuals, no drying marks and no dust on the film. And the shortest drying time you ever had.</p>

    <p>To those who are afraid of using paper kitchen towels because they think half of the towel will be on the film:</p>

    <p>1. use good quality towels, fold the towel twice along and once across and squeeze the hanging film _once_ from top to bottom. Make sure the side of the paper which faces inwards on the roll is the side that touches the film.</p>

    anders petersen

    in Black & White Practice

    Posted

    <p>The answer is "I don't know", but there is a couple of reasons why I have kept an interest in his work for several decades (he is Swedish like me and he has taken a lot of pictures in my home town, Hamburg, and I simply like his pictures) and I will therefore try to guess how his gets the gritty grain.</p>

    <p>When he started out, the high speed films were Tri-X and HP3 or 4. I have been to where he took some of his pictures (Café Lehmitz) and the light is pretty dim in there. You simply have to push develop because a tripod would not be very helpful in those circumstances. Push a lot, that is. I guess D76 or Rodinal. Or perhaps he used what Swedish photographers used for pushing in the sixties. They called it "Russian soup". No idea what it was.</p>

    <p>But why don't you send him an email and ask him. The address is on his website.</p>

×
×
  • Create New...