Is someone using Tmax100 as a versatile film?

[NB23]

Sure!
People confusing zone focusing with shooting from the hip.
Maybe some bitter people feeling unhappy with their photography or their lives too... But who knows?
And that's not this thread's subject, as OP says.

Tmax muddy, for one.
And all the rest.


If you try to be sarcastic about me not being happy with my Photography, please try again.
There is indeed a lot of misconceptions about film and general photography practice in this thread.

 

[NB23]

Iphone shot of a print, tmax 100.

Everything that can be said is said in this simple shot:
-not muddy
-correct focus
-correct composition
-iso 100
-acceptable depth of field
-acceptable print

 

[Craig75]

You all keep walking into juans traps of dogmatic babble disguised as innocent questions

 

[Craig75]

Iphone shot of a print, tmax 100.

Everything that can be said is said in this simple shot:
-not muddy
-correct focus
-correct composition
-iso 100
-acceptable depth of field
-acceptable print


View attachment 274246

Nice shot

 

[NB23]

You all keep walking into juans traps of dogmatic babble disguised as innocent questions

Meh. He’s always come across as a passive aggressive innocentino.

 

[Craig75]

Meh. He’s always come across as a passive aggressive innocentino.

Youve missed the bombshell of juans educational book earlier in the thread.

 

[grain elevator]

As we're discussing everything TMX now, what about that shiny emulsion side? I got Newton rings from that (with other films only from the base side, and the grain is smooth enough that the pattern of anti-newton glass under the film shows in prints). That's all the beef I have with it, outstanding film otherwise. Agree that "flat" or "muddy" claims make no sense, just develop it longer then!

 

[Don_ih]

It is just different than other films, so one has to learn how to take advantage of it.

I didn't say I don't use it. I said many people think it's too flat for things like street photography (since I can't use "muddy"). That I don't like enlarging it is just my own preference (although I do enlarge it frequently).

 

[foc]

The king of zone focusing.



Bert Hardy (English documentary and press photographer 1913-1955) quotes:
" I usually take a chance. I'm not always correct on distance, because I rarely stop to focus, in case I miss the picture. My principle is: grab it first, then have a second go if you have time to focus"
"A rule I sometimes adapt is to keep the camera set at a certain distance, say six feet. Then if the odd incident crops up, I can quickly be within six feet of it."

 

[Cholentpot]

I don't understand the muddy comment. Tmax is muddy? What are you doing with it?

As for zone focusing, many cameras and lenses come with this wonderful thing called a calculator or something. I just use that and it seems to get the job done.

 

[Helge]

You need to know exactly what a meter (or foot) is and feels like.
Get a solid measuring stick (not a folding yardstick) and play around with it.
Keep it nearby as often as possible.
You need to internalize and get a visual feel for that single measure of distance.
It’s often longer than people think, and with other people sometimes less.
You need to calibrate yourself.
Get a cheap laser rangefinder.
You can use it indoors and for stills, but it’s actually more useful for photography in teaching you to judge distance and giving you confidence in your own ability to do so.
Take up the same hobby as Shigeru Miyamoto:
https://www.google.dk/amp/s/www.pol...shigeru-miyamoto-tonight-show-measuring-video

 

[Cholentpot]

You need to know exactly what a meter (or foot) is and feels like.
Get a solid measuring stick (not a folding yardstick) and play around with it.
Keep it nearby as often as possible.
You need to internalize and get a visual feel for that single measure of distance.
It’s often longer than people think, and with other people sometimes less.
You need to calibrate yourself.
Get a cheap laser rangefinder.
You can use it indoors and for stills, but it’s actually more useful for photography in teaching you to judge distance and giving you confidence in your own ability to do so.
Take up the same hobby as Shigeru Miyamoto:
https://www.google.dk/amp/s/www.pol...shigeru-miyamoto-tonight-show-measuring-video

Easy, a foot is a foot. It's three feet? Guess that's about three steps. I never had an issue with it, never bothered with a rope or a stick.

 

[SilverShutter]

TMax muddy ?????????????????????????????????? On which planet? Doesn't enlarge well? Do you use a Coke bottle for an enlarging lens? Ordinary folks didn't scan anything when TMax films came onto the market. It was meant for optical enlarging and contact prints from day one, with relatively minor improvements since then.

Even scanned, Tmax 100 behaves extremely well. I would consider to call muddy something like Foma 200, or Kentmere 100 but not Tmax. It may not be the most apparently sharp film but it resolves small details extremely well and preseves the tonality very nicely too.

 

[NB23]

I didn't say I don't use it. I said many people think it's too flat for things like street photography (since I can't use "muddy"). That I don't like enlarging it is just my own preference (although I do enlarge it frequently).

This is the sad world we’re in today.

The “many people” you are refering to are internet nobodies. And those same “many people” are probably stand-developing Tmax100 because they heard other “many people” recomending stand development.

In the end, “many people” end up with shitty results from a film that is probably the best film on the market, by having butchered it.

Let’s not forget that tmx was formulated with D76 as its main developer. It was tailored around D76. Amazing combo.

 

[Helge]

This is the sad world we’re in today.

The “many people” you are refering to are internet nobodies. And those same “many people” are probably stand-developing Tmax100 because they heard other “many people” recomending stand development.

In the end, “many people” end up with shitty results from a film that is probably the best film on the market, by having butchered it.

Let’s not forget that tmx was formulated with D76 as its main developer. It was tailored around D76. Amazing combo.

Really didn’t know that. Any sources on that? Thought TMax developer was the target?
But yes I’ve been getting great results from D76 with TMX.
I’d even say I prefer it the teensiest bit over XTOL with that particular film.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Newton ring issues in glass carriers? Yes, that is an issue, and is why I use carriers with Anti-Newton glass on both sides. And yes, TMax 100 is disappointing in terms of edge acutance in common developers. It holds tremendous detail, but the Mackie line effect is poor in comparison to its big brother TMY400, which has excellent edge effect. That softer edge rendering can be a real plus in portraiture, but a minus in things like landscape rendering. I know how to dramatically improve edge contrast with a certain developer tweak which I don't have time to explain now - it's on previous TMax-related threads.

It wasn't necessarily formulated for D76 at all. That's a myth. Yes, they were marketed together as a convenience concept, because 76 was readily available and their own product, and sorta a middle-of-the-road developer. But as I stated earlier, TMX was engineered for multiple applications at once, some of them technical, forensic, and in relation to advanced color processes like dye transfer no longer available. Therefore, there were technical recommendations for other developers too, including their own TMax and TMax RS developers intended for better results than D76. But that's another story for another time.

 

[Helge]

Easy, a foot is a foot. It's three feet? Guess that's about three steps. I never had an issue with it, never bothered with a rope or a stick.

I was thinking more along the lines of three feet at a time.
That’s not as intuitive.
And perhaps other fixed, rehearsed distances.
If you find that easy and natural at first, good for you. But most people will have to work a bit for it.

 

[MattKing]

I'm about six feet tall.
I find six feet to work well.

 

[Paul Howell]

Hi,
Do the films you like give you an option for zone focusing with ISO100 film?

Zone Focusing seems to a red herring, issue is can you hand hold a 35mm using an ISO 100 film, meaning can you hold the shutter speed while shooting at F 8 to 16. Answer is yes, you can hand hold a 35mm with a normal 50 or wide lens shooting Tmax 100 at box speed in sunny weather. Sunny 16 rule, 125th of a second at F16. If you bump the ISO to 160 Kodak does not event count as a push, but you get another 1/2 stop so you can shoot at maybe 1/250 at F 16, to shoot 1/500 at F11, 1/1000 at F8. Adjust for lighting, when a working PJ I hand held Nikon F, F2 and 3 at 1/30th of second with a normal lens, quite common. A one stop push with a tmax film is pretty good with shadow detail and maybe 20% increase in developing time. At that point your shooting 1/250th at F 16 in good weather. When pushing Tmax I use Tmax or DDX.

 

[Don_ih]

In the end, “many people” end up with shitty results from a film that is probably the best film on the market, by having butchered it.

Isn't that the case with almost all film being used? I mean, obviously "internet nobodies" would ruin any film they get their hands on. Also obvious, the "internet somebodies" do a far better job....

 

[NB23]

Isn't that the case with almost all film being used? I mean, obviously "internet nobodies" would ruin any film they get their hands on. Also obvious, the "internet somebodies" do a far better job....

You are forgeting a very important detail: we are talking about TMX100, an extremely good film. Bad results are a result of butchering, nothing else really...

 

[mshchem]

Old Verichrome flap. All you need outside with negative film. My wallet is hard on these.

 

[Don_ih]

You are forgeting a very important detail: we are talking about TMX100, an extremely good film.

Then it only stands to reason that "many people" would ruin that film extremely well.
I'm not actually forgetting anything. That Tmax is an extremely good film does not guarantee it will behave the way a particular photographer wants for a particular situation. Otherwise, photographers would only ever shoot Tmax. Perhaps you would argue they should only use Tmax. Personally, I would be fine only ever using Tmax 100 and 400 - I could probably be satisfied with just 400. But many people like variety, for their own reasons.

 

[Cholentpot]

Can we see more peoples examples of Tmax 100?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Can we see more peoples examples of Tmax 100?

Here are Tmax100 samples in 6x7 and 4x5. You have to look at each to see which is which.
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=tmax100&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1