pushing kentmere 400 in tmax dev

[j.ponakmo]

I've been going through my bulk roll (s) of K400 and i've finally gotten around to pushing to both 800 and 1600. I decided to develop in Tmax because i noticed the grain is more toned down versus D76, and really for some reason the grain just looks different. At 20C with a rough extrapolation of my standard processing times for 800 and 1600 i got negatives that look really great. I was surprised by how subdued the grain was and that the high lights still looked good. has anyone else had any success with pushing the kentmere. here's a sample that really doesn't do it justice, pushed to 800. i just realized i hadn't scanned any of the other photos yet.


that's medieval lute played by josef van wissem live in madison wi

 

[Toffle]

Considering how grainy this film is at 400 in HC-110, I'd say you have done very well with this.

Cheers,
Tom

 

[j.ponakmo]

epson 4490, it's a scan of the negative btw. i printed from a negative i'd pushed to 1600 too and i really dug it.

 

[j.ponakmo]

well, i might suggest getting one because when i bought mine a year ago it was very inexpensive.

 

[heterolysis]

I've pushed Kentmere 100 to 1600 in DD-X just to see what would happen (it was the last roll I had on hand one evening). For obvious reasons it wasn't a smashing success, but it came out looking similar to my experiences with Delta 3200 under similar circumstances. Narrow range, obvious grain, but all things considered I was suprised how well it turned out.

 

[ic-racer]

Nice Lute. But I'm not sure what would compel someone to purposely under-expose when using a flash at close range?

 

[j.ponakmo]

i was using a point and shoot and it was still pretty dark in there and for some reason the guy started meandering around the audience which was my photo opportunity. sooo, i guess it's the AE. also i'm not a pro at judging lighting and exposure compensation.