High-speed: TMY vs TMZ vs Neopan vs Delta, all @ 800

[Colden]

I recently shot some Tmax 3200 @ 1600 and developed in Sprint chemistry, and the grain was unacceptable. In this regard, please help choose high-speed film from:

TMY (Tmax 400) to be shot @ 800
TMZ (Tmax 3200) to be shot @ 800
Neopan 1600 to be shot @ 800
Delta 3200 to be shot @ 800

I will most likely develop in Xtol (and not Sprint) this time. If I am missing a viable alternative, i.e. Tri-X or HP5+, please let me know, but I need real/true shadow detail @ 800. The reason I included TMY in the choice (in addition to the 3 usual suspects) is, of course, APUG, in particular reading several good reports of the pushed TMY/Xtol combination. This is all for 35mm.

Almost forgot: if you have example images where grain is visible (or invisible, heh) please include to illustrate your recommendation.

Thank you in advance.

 

[clay]

Grain is a very subjective thing, but I find that TMZ@800-1200 is acceptable for prints up to 10x15. I used to use FX-39 for this, but since its demise, I have been searching for an alternative. The developers on the shortlist that provide high acutance along with pleasing, acceptable grain are Ilfosol-S, FX-37, and Pyrocat-P. If you want to push a slower film, I would think that Tri-x would be a better bet for getting at least some shadow detail versus TMY, which has a very short toe.

 

[c6h6o3]

The only thing I've found which pushes TMY is minimal agitation or semi-stand development. The developer used for this is irrelevant as long as it's a staining developer.

The rating of a film is a function of where Zones III and IV come up off of the toe and I've only been able to affect that with exposure. No amount or formula for development that I've ever used can accomplish it; only the process.

I would love to be able to push Tmax. Until someone tells me about a developer that I can try which will give me good shadow detail at higher film speed (I rate it at 200 and put the darkest part of the picture on Zone IV), I'll continue to relegate the subject of push development to the Myth column.

 

[craigclu]

Long ago, I was testing Prescysol with various films. I ran some Delta 3200 at 1200, used the semi-stand method with the Prescysol. The film was in a 6X7 at a soccer game of my son's on a dreary day. The prints were virtually grainless with good, honest shadow detail and they made for easy printing, too. I don't tend to keep high speed films around and never got back to the experiment but this single episode left me very impressed with the combination. I just went and found a shot from that roll... The sun had peaked through at the end of the game but this shows that it had good highlight control, too. Not too great a shot but a good example of the film/developer combo.

 

[varjag]

I would love to be able to push Tmax. Until someone tells me about a developer that I can try which will give me good shadow detail at higher film speed (I rate it at 200 and put the darkest part of the picture on Zone IV), I'll continue to relegate the subject of push development to the Myth column.

Push processing is not about good shadow detail, it is about getting a printable image at all in circumstances where normal rating/processing is not sufficient. So your definition of it is indeed a myth.

 

[Ryuji]

For EI 800, I suggest Delta 400 developed in Microphen 1+1. TMY is not very good for speed, and its highlight contrast will not be easy to tame if developed for anything higher than the box speed. Delta 400 is probably the best 400-rated film for EI 800.

Delta 3200 is good for EI 1000-1600 but I don't think you need it for 800.

 

[Paul Howell]

I recently shot some Tmax 3200 @ 1600 and developed in Sprint chemistry, and the grain was unacceptable.

I have not used Sprint products so I don't have a real comparsion, but for good grain and shadow detail I have used Tmax 3200 rated at 1600 and developed in Microdol X, 35mm was good to a 16X20. Best overall has been Tmax or Delta 3200 rated at 1600 developed in DDX or TMax, I have also used D777 and Edwal 12, but the I thought the tones in DDX were more to my liking. I have also pushed HP5 to 800 in Edwal 12 with rather good results, and I dont how many rolls of Tri X I have shote over the years at 1200 in Dinafine and 800 in Acufine. For best grain and shadow detail at 800 I would suggest Tri X in Dinafine or Acuifine. I have not used Dinafine in several years but my best guess is that you can get true 3200 in Dinafine with either TMAX or Delta 3200.

Paul

 

[Nicole]

Delta 400 exposed at 400, 800 and 1600 is very nice in dev'd Xtol.

 

[Markok765]

i like it in rodinal 1+25