Developing TMAX 400 in Xtol

[braxus]

I shot my first roll of TMAX 400 since around 25 years. I developed it in Xtol straight at 6.5 minutes. I ended up with a negative that looked normal. Some shots were less dense then normal exposure as well on the neg. Yet when I scanned it up on my Epson flatbed (I shot 120), a few shots the highlights -were bordering on, if not actually, blown out. I like the look TMAX 400 gives for B&W, but it seems a little tricky on the scans.

Did I overdevelop? I doubt it since the negs weren't very dense on quite a few shots. So what could be going wrong? Or is this normal for this film? I tried to tame it a little in the scan.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Develop. 1+2. Semi for about 13@68 and begin to utilize the best film ever made
Blown highlights are an illusion you don't need

 

[MattKing]

Show us the negatives instead of scans.
FWIW, scanning T-Max is slightly different than scanning Plus-X (which is the other film I've scanned regularly). Just as printing T-Max is slightly different than printing Plus-X.
So you may find that you just need to adjust your approach to scanning slightly.

 

[braxus]

Heres the best I can show.

 

[MattKing]

They look pretty normal to me. Maybe slightly more development than to my taste, but nothing clearly wrong.
The highlight areas are, of course, significantly more dense than the non-highlight areas, but that looks to be a function of the lighting and subject than the film.
If you are used to a film that shoulders more, and therefore tends to suppress that build up of density, you may wish to adjust your approach to development or scanning.
Most likely there is lots of usable detail in those highlights, when you burn them in a bit.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Your negatives look fine. TMY and Xtol were made for each other... Try it at 1+1.

 

[braxus]

Maybe slightly more development than to my taste, but nothing clearly wrong.
The highlight areas are, of course, significantly more dense than the non-highlight areas,

Would developing at 6 minutes instead of 6 1/2 be better?

 

[braxus]

Well its an old scanner, so I imagine it doesn't like negs that are too dense in areas.

 

[pentaxuser]

Well its an old scanner, so I imagine it doesn't like negs that are too dense in areas.

Is that why I see some colour(light brown in the main) in parts of most of the negs or is that my VDU, given no-one else seems to have seen any or lat least hasn't mentioned it ?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[braxus]

I shot the pictures with my P&S digi camera, so it was reflecting parts on the plastic Printfile sheets. There is no color in the negs. As for the scans, they shouldn't have any color.

 

[pentaxuser]

Braxus, thanks for your reply

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Well its an old scanner, so I imagine it doesn't like negs that are too dense in areas.

Would developing at 6 minutes instead of 6 1/2 be better?

Don't change your development (for now). Change the settings in your scanning software.
I bet those negatives will print very nicely in the darkroom.

 

[braxus]

What settings should I look at? Flatbed don't have a lot of options

 

[MattKing]

We are straying into the hybrid realm. I'll start a Conversation with you.

 

[warden]

Heres the best I can show.

Those negatives look fine to me.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

What settings should I look at? Flatbed don't have a lot of options

Your pictures look good. There's a little white clipping on the guy's forehead and on the fence rail. You might be able to improve that using White slider in Lightroom or equivalent.

I scan with a V850 (before with a V600). The only setting I use is setting the black and white points just beyond the edges of the actual histogram for each shot I scan. That gives me the full extent of the range shot so there's no clipping from the scan although if you clipped the original film, you're pretty much stuck with that. I use 16-bit grayscale at 2400. All other scanner adjustments are shut off. If there's still a little clipping in the final scan results, I use Whites and Blacks sliders in Lightroom to reduce or eliminate them. Then I adjust contrast and sharpness and other stuff to taste. Good luck.
Tmax 400 35mm v850: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums/72157716777378896

 

[braxus]

I was told about the histogram on my software, so I'll try that. I also use Epson software. Im using the 2400 flatbed scanner.

I was surprised at how much I liked TMAX 400. Though it had weird grain structure on human skin, the tones were really good on that. I could see the stubble on his face with the scan off 6x9. Im really liking using the Fuji 690 cameras. I like the wider frame matching 35mm. Only thing is I need to bring a second camera with me to use its light meter. I dont have a Sekonic yet.

 

[pentaxuser]

Braxus, ever considered trying darkroom prints? Your negs look fine now I realise what he colour problem was. I think scanning problems largely disappear with darkroom prints

pentaxuser

 

[braxus]

I live in a place where there is no way I could put a darkroom in. All the bathrooms have windows and skylights. And Im not going to be living here much longer to start covering things up. I can develop film, but I can't make my own prints chemically.

 

[DMJ]

What settings should I look at? Flatbed don't have a lot of options

Do you have the Epson perfection 2400 photo? That scanner does not allow you to scan 120, how do you do it? Also, I have different results depending on the OS, it seems that the driver for Mac is much better, I use both Mac and Windows.
There are many options given by the software, look here:

https://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/scanning/index.php

Should this thread be moved(?)

Martin

 

[braxus]

Yes mine is the Epson Perfection 2400. I bought it in 2001 and got the 4x5 light attachment slightly afterwards. Im surprised you can still use it today in Windows 10, but its scans have been beat by the V850. Thats a future purchase.

Yeah Im wondering if this should be in the hybrid section now?

 

[MattKing]

Yeah Im wondering if this should be in the hybrid section now?

Yep.
It would be a great subject for a new thread there. If you start one, put a link to it here.
If it is any consolation, every scanner and every scanning software program I have ever used gave me disappointing results when I first started using it, or started using it with something new.
It works the same with enlargers.
Most of the scans you see from me now are done on a used scanner I paid $100.00 for.
Which is just about what I paid for my two new enlargers - the ones that I'm doing prints with now.
One is a scan from an 11x14 print done on one of those enlargers, the other is a direct scan from a slide - same camera, same position, two film magazines:

from the print - which came from a T-Max 400 negative

from the slide.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Nice shot; nice scan.

 

[removedacct1]

TMY in Xtol is a match made in heaven. Xtol is very good at preventing highlights from becoming blocked/overdeveloped. Your negatives look close to optimal (not overdeveloped) so I suspect you need to tweak scanner settings.

 

[MattKing]

Nice shot; nice scan.

Thanks. I'm actually happiest about how well they serve as an example.
The black and white image (including the toning) is the result of stitching together two halves of an 11x14 toned print.