T-Max 100

Mike Kennedy · Mar 12, 2008

Being a Tri-X main liner I find it very difficult to get my head around the "T" grain structure of this film.It seems to pasteurized to me.That said,I have about 90ft of the stuff and would like to find an alternative way to shoot it.Maybe adjust the box speed or developer? All suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

jim appleyard · Mar 12, 2008

Having shot globs of this stuff in the 80's and into the 90's, I could never seem to get it "right". So, I went back to trad films; Plus-X, etc.

About four years ago, a friend gave me a couple of rolls of T-Max 100 that he wasn't going to shoot (he likes TMY400) and I souped it in Rodinal at an EI of 64, the times used were on the back of the Rodinal bottle, probably 1+25. Well, I still don't like T-Max, but those Rodinal negs were the best I've ever done with that film.

Mike Kennedy · Mar 12, 2008

Thanks Jim.Maybe your advice will be the magic bullet I'm looking for.

removed account4 · Mar 12, 2008

mike

try a clip test and shoot it at 50
and processing it without agitation
in dektol ( if you use it )
dilute 1:6 for about 15-20mins.

you might like the look ...

Mike Kennedy · Mar 12, 2008

Another great idea.I'll check to see if my local shop has any Dektol.

dpurdy · Mar 12, 2008

"too pasteurized" That is an interesting subjective description. I am not sure what it means. It is interesting reading threads asking what film to use and why, they are full of personal descriptions. Usually like .. so and so film is stunning, or beautiful, dramatic. Lots of terms that have no real solid meaning. Perhaps someone should start a dictionary for terms used to describe the look of film. When I first used Tmax 100 for portraits I got the weirdest looking skin tone, like the skin was blank light grey without much modulation. It struck me as "muggy". That impression stuck with me a long time and I never used the film. Then I tried it again and got really beautiful glowing skin tone. I am not sure what changed, me or the film. I guess looking too pasturized might mean looking too accurate or perhaps no range of tones stand out in the print. I think the rodinal is a good suggestion for it.

Paul Howell · Mar 12, 2008

The only developers that I like with TMax 100 are Edwal 12 or 777. I have a few 35mm rolls that are going to expire in a few months that I will soup in DK 50 or Acufine, maybe I will get lucky. For the most part I now shot Forma Pan 400 for high speed, and Pan F or Efke 25 for low speed, the mid range just does not seem fit my needs at the moment.

Ian Grant · Mar 12, 2008

Started using Tmax100 alongside AP100 then APX100 when Tmax100 was first released and haven't stopped. Initially I used Rodinal but after about 145 years began also using Xtol (replenished). Now I use Pyrocat HD for 90% of my Tmax processing, but still use Xtol for some commercial work.

Tmax100 is a superb film it's only failing is it's effective EI for my uses is a full stop less than APX100 but apart from that the results are indistinguishable. I stopped using APX100 when they dropped the sheet film.

Ian

Konical · Mar 12, 2008

Good Afternoon, Mike,

Try T-100 in T-Max developer diluted 1:7 (from the original concentrate) at about 10 minutes as a starting point.

Konical

jim appleyard · Mar 12, 2008

dpurdy said:
"too pasteurized" That is an interesting subjective description. I am not sure what it means. It is interesting reading threads asking what film to use and why, they are full of personal descriptions. Usually like .. so and so film is stunning, or beautiful, dramatic. Lots of terms that have no real solid meaning. Perhaps someone should start a dictionary for terms used to describe the look of film. When I first used Tmax 100 for portraits I got the weirdest looking skin tone, like the skin was blank light grey without much modulation. It struck me as "muggy". That impression stuck with me a long time and I never used the film. Then I tried it again and got really beautiful glowing skin tone. I am not sure what changed, me or the film. I guess looking too pasturized might mean looking too accurate or perhaps no range of tones stand out in the print. I think the rodinal is a good suggestion for it.

Good point about the personal descriptions. Perhaps I should add more (unscientific descriptions) as to why I don't like T-Max: I found its contrast to be muddy, dull and lifeless. My negsprints didn't sing the way they did with Pan-X, Plus-X and Tri-X. I souped T-Max 100 in everything from FG-7 to Ethol 90--not one dev did the trick. As soon as I went back to trad-grain films in good old D-76, the sparkle was back. BTW, I did shoot several hundred feet of T-Max; it was THE film and I would think several hundred feet would be enough to "get to know a film".

sanking · Mar 12, 2008

jim appleyard said:
Good point about the personal descriptions. Perhaps I should add more (unscientific descriptions) as to why I don't like T-Max: I found its contrast to be muddy, dull and lifeless. My negsprints didn't sing the way they did with Pan-X, Plus-X and Tri-X. I souped T-Max 100 in everything from FG-7 to Ethol 90--not one dev did the trick. As soon as I went back to trad-grain films in good old D-76, the sparkle was back. BTW, I did shoot several hundred feet of T-Max; it was THE film and I would think several hundred feet would be enough to "get to know a film".

I love T-MAX 100 in 120 size. I find it to be crystal clear, just the right contrast, exciting and full of life. I have developed it in several different developers and it sparkles in all of them.

Now D76 and Plus-X, there is something to bore a person to death!! No warmth, no bouquet, no after-taste, and too dry without a hint of fruit!!

Sandy King

Alex Hawley · Mar 12, 2008

sanking said:
I love T-MAX 100 in 120 size. I find it to be crystal clear, just the right contrast, exciting and full of life.

Same here, but Ive only developed it in Pyrocat-HD with extreme minimal agitation. I couldn't believe the negs! I was shooting with my old Bessa 1 folder and Yashica TLR.

jim appleyard · Mar 12, 2008

sanking said:
I love T-MAX 100 in 120 size. I find it to be crystal clear, just the right contrast, exciting and full of life. I have developed it in several different developers and it sparkles in all of them.

Now D76 and Plus-X, there is something to bore a person to death!! No warmth, no bouquet, no after-taste, and too dry without a hint of fruit!!

Sandy King

Is this why there are many kinds of film and devs???

sanking · Mar 12, 2008

jim appleyard said:
Is this why there are many kinds of film and devs???

Jim,

Are you referring to the film characteristic of bouquet or fruitiness?

Sandy King

jim appleyard · Mar 13, 2008

Bouquet, of course!

Richjsn1 · Mar 13, 2008

I have been using TMAX 120 for years....love it. The 16x20 are excellent with deep blacks and a tonal range that I honestly cannot say I have seen better. To each there own.

dynachrome · Mar 13, 2008

TMX

TMX will never be my favorite film but I have had some luck with it at 100 in straight Microphen.

Chuck_P · Mar 14, 2008

Ian Grant said:
Tmax100 is a superb film it's only failing is it's effective EI for my uses is a full stop less than APX100 but apart from that the results are indistinguishable. I stopped using APX100 when they dropped the sheet film.

Ian

I was expecting this when I tested TMX because with most it seems that they were arriving at 1/2 the box speed. However, my tests with 4x5 in D-76 (1:1) using a combi-plan tank turned out to be an effective EI of 100 and I'm very pleased so far.
__________________
As a general discussion statement about T-max, it's no secret that if one does not adhere to strict darkroom practices with consistency of temp, agitation, and time, then this film can be a "head scratcher" to someone who is used to the forgiving nature of the other traditional emulsions like TX and PX. When Sexton wrote that "You must have repeatable work habits and procedures. Be concerned about 1 degree changes in developing temperatures", he was not being overdramatic as I have learned this myself with this film.

Chuck

Doug Webb · Mar 15, 2008

When I saw what John Sexton and Clyde Butcher were able to do with TMAX I wanted to be able to do the same. That was quite a while back. Needless to say, I was really disappointed at first. For the longest time, and I am talking about years, I couldn't get results that I liked, even though TriX, FP4, PanF, and HP5 were working for me. Finally, in 2007, I found a combination of exposure below 100 and development in PMK that produced something I really want to be able to recreate and keep using, and hopefully even improve on. For me, it has been a long and I would also say somewhat expensive road, but worth it, and I would guess that there is still more that can be obtained with this film, if I keep improving my methods. My luck would be that now that I havve decided this is a favorite, they will discontinue it.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 15, 2008

I found that TMax 100 shot at 50 and developed in Rodinal 1+100 is a fantastic combination. But for me it doesn't have enough grain. But apart from that I find it a superb film. Be careful not to over-develop. I've had highlights block up horribly for me, but that's probably more my fault than the film.

- Thomas

Trevor Crone · Mar 15, 2008

Doug Webb said:
When I saw what John Sexton and Clyde Butcher were able to do with TMAX I wanted to be able to do the same. That was quite a while back. Needless to say, I was really disappointed at first. For the longest time, and I am talking about years, I couldn't get results that I liked, even though TriX, FP4, PanF, and HP5 were working for me. Finally, in 2007, I found a combination of exposure below 100 and development in PMK that produced something I really want to be able to recreate and keep using, and hopefully even improve on. For me, it has been a long and I would also say somewhat expensive road, but worth it, and I would guess that there is still more that can be obtained with this film, if I keep improving my methods. My luck would be that now that I havve decided this is a favorite, they will discontinue it.

Couldn't agree more. I rate it at ISO 80/dev. in PMK pyro. I do hope Kodak don't discontinue Readyloads, so convienient and such clean negatives.

cotdt · Mar 15, 2008

ISO100 is just great in Ilford DD-X. in other developers you lose speed

fschifano · Mar 16, 2008

I couldn't agree more with the necessity for maintaining strict temperature and timing controls with this film. Small variations do have a greater effect upon it, and TMY for that matter, than on more conventional films. But once you get that under control, the film is a real winner. For those times when you want a film with as close to no grain as possible, TMX is the one. I rate it at box speed and develop in XTOL 1+1. Nice stuff.

mikez · Mar 18, 2008

I've gotten great results with TMAX100 sheets (tray development, I know I'm low budget here ) with XTOL and DDX.

T-Max 100

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency