Help! T-Max 400 exposed at 3200

[Matt5791]

I have accidentally exposed T-Max 400 (35mm) at 3200 - two rolls. Worse still, it was at a wedding. I was shooting in colour too with a separate camera so it's not the end of the world, but there will be some nice moments on the T-Max

Anyone have suggestions as to suitable developer and time combinations? I have no idea how well this film will push.

Many thanks,
Matt

 

[mesh]

Hi Matt - I dont have the times on me - I will have a look later on if you don't get better advice in the meantime ;-) I did almost exactly the same thing only a few weeks ago - mine was 2 stops instead of 3, and the results were fine. Don't stress too much, because you will definitely get some keepers! Not a nice feeling but rest assured, TMAX pushes well. What developer do you normally use?

 

[Matt5791]

I've had nice results with Xtol and T-max. But I'm open to anything. Thanks for that - I just didn't know whether it pushed well or not.

 

[Tim Gray]

I'd look up the times in the XTOL pdf or the Tmax 400 pdf. Looking there, I see 10 minutes at 75 degrees with XTOL 1:1 for EI 3200. You might want to go shoot a test roll at 3200 and dev that first to see if you need to make any adjustments.

 

[David Grenet]

My experience with TMY is that it pushes just fine. I shot a roll at 1600 and developed in Microphen stock for 10 minutes at 20C (I think) and the results look pretty good - not tack-sharp but surprisingly little grain.

 

[Matt5791]

Thanks very much - Great - Kodak actually say it can be done. This makes me feel a lot better. Who knows, maybe I'll like the results.

The funny thing about black and white, how mistakes often lead to discoveries!

 

[Marc Leest]

I would consider XTOL 1:3 for pushing T-MAX. Do a testroll as already suggested. However i fear the shadows are gone in the negatives.

good luck

 

[Leksius]

Look at the website Digitaltruth for the The Massive Dev Chart

Good luck

 

[clayne]

XTOL. You'll definitely lose significant shadow detail but if you were metering accurately at 3200 you should have some usable negs.

 

[fschifano]

Hey, good luck. One stop push? OK, it usually works pretty well. Two stop push? Maybe. Odds are starting to stack up against you unless you really know what you're doing. Three stop push? Fuggetaboutit!

 

[clayne]

Hey, good luck. One stop push? OK, it usually works pretty well. Two stop push? Maybe. Odds are starting to stack up against you unless you really know what you're doing. Three stop push? Fuggetaboutit!

Forget about what? Adequate shadow detail? Sure. Forget about obtaining a usable image? Absolutely not. Go out and push some 400 speed film to 3200, develop with a suitable developer, and if you tell me you don't have images that can be practically printed then I will tell you your standards are too high.

 

[Nicole]

I'd recommend using The Massive Dev Chart online and Xtol.

 

[Matt5791]

I'm just thinking - how about T-Max developer? The Kodak PDF also gives times for this too. Anyone got any experience there? (I't's just that I have some open on the shelf)

 

[markbarendt]

7.25 min @ 75 f Xtol

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j109/j109.pdf

When in doubt read the directions.

 

[Tim Gray]

TMAX dev would probably work. I use XTOL, so that's what I'd use. There's also some advantage to using it 1:1 as opposed to stock in terms of shadow speed. Have no idea how TMAX compares.

 

[fschifano]

Forget about what? Adequate shadow detail? Sure. Forget about obtaining a usable image? Absolutely not. Go out and push some 400 speed film to 3200, develop with a suitable developer, and if you tell me you don't have images that can be practically printed then I will tell you your standards are too high.

Well then, maybe my standards are too high. With a three stop underexposure, almost all of the density is going to fall very near the toe of the contrast curve. The details will be thin and low contrast. A lot will get lost in the murk. So yeah, if you have very even lighting and not too much in the way of dark tones in there, you might be able to print it up onto a hard contrast paper and get away with it.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Look up Massive Dev Chart. I have used T-max developer on T-max film on that iso/asa combo before. It is going to be grainy, but usable.

Jeff

 

[pentaxuser]

I am sure Frank didn't mean it to sound so negative but when someone is in trouble and the occasion matters, especially a wedding, then saying "forget it" might have led anyone of a pessimistic nature who is often by temperament his own worse critic to simply pull the film out of the camera or cassette and throw in the bin. What a waste that would have been.

We need to think carefully before using negative throw-away lines.

Best of luck Matt but I am sure as others have said there will be some useable negs from which there will be very useable prints.

pentaxuser

 

[clayne]

I'm just thinking - how about T-Max developer? The Kodak PDF also gives times for this too. Anyone got any experience there? (I't's just that I have some open on the shelf)

XTOL is preferable for this situation. Seeing as it's a wedding, I'd go with it.

 

[removed account4]

wish this place existed when i accidently exposed tmx (100 ) at 3200 ...
i figured it out by trial add error ... at least YOU have an good starting point,
i just had stress as my inspiration ...

i would shoot a roll ( or even 2 or 3 ) at 3200 and trial + error use xtol
or tmax, "xyz" developer and see what you get. i would even try a print developer like dektol ( if you have it )
sometimes the best things come from mistakes!

good luck!
john

 

[Matt5791]

It's going to be Xtol - I'm going to try a test too and hope to get it done this weekend (they are on honeymoon right now and so I have some time) I took all the other normal stuff to the lab.

I'll post some results.