T-Max 3200 processing time exp at 1600

Matt5791 · Nov 25, 2005

The Paterson Aculux says processing time of 16 mins for Tmax 3200.

I have exposed this film at 1600 - do I reduce the processing time?

Thanks,

Matt

Kevin Caulfield · Nov 25, 2005

The rough rule of thumb would be to reduce development time by about a quarter to a third for each stop. Try about 12 minutes.

NikoSperi · Nov 25, 2005

Never mind... in vino veritas not.

Some find the true speed slower than 3200. I don't. But you could process as usual, saying the true speed is closer to 1600 than 3200.

Kevin Caulfield · Nov 25, 2005

Wouldn't exposing it at 1600 be overexposing it? You would be giving it twice the exposure that you would for 3200?

NikoSperi · Nov 25, 2005

Kevin Caulfield said:
Wouldn't exposing it at 1600 be overexposing it? You would be giving it twice the exposure that you would for 3200?

Yes, of course. I had a champagne-induced brain cramp there before I edited... Sorry.

Kevin Caulfield · Nov 25, 2005

That's okay. I was nearly about to agree with you before I had a proper think about it.

johnnywalker · Nov 25, 2005

I suppose a lot depends on the developer you're using, but a lot of people (me included) find that exposing it at 1600 and developing for 3200 works well. I've usually developed it with DD-X.

Matt5791 · Nov 26, 2005

OK, thanks for the replies everyone.

I went with the first suggestion which was:

Aculux for 12 minutes

I presoaked the film and fixed it twice.

The negs are sparkling and look really sharp!

(apart from the last 10 shots on the roll which had a little vignetting which looks like a camera problem. I can easily crop it out during printing without changing the composition of the print as it is only small, but irritating none the less)

Thanks for the help everyone!

Matt

Kevin Caulfield · Nov 26, 2005

Phew, I'm glad my suggestion worked! I only said ABOUT 12 minutes, but if the negs are sparkling and sharp then, well done.

gnashings · Nov 26, 2005

Kevin Caulfield said:
Phew, I'm glad my suggestion worked! I only said ABOUT 12 minutes, but if the negs are sparkling and sharp then, well done.

No, Kevin, no no no! All wrong! This is where you post:

"Hmm, yes, exactly as I have predicted. Hold my calls, I'll be on my mountain top!"

That's what I would have done, heheehehehee - you are waaaay too modest!

Peter.

Lee L · Nov 26, 2005

I'm glad you got good results. Testing is always the best way.

The following is from Kodak's tech info bulletin for P3200, and I had it posted at the front desk of the lab I used to work in. I feel that the P3200 designation is at best misleading for most developers, so I always throw this out when people start asking about EI ratings for P3200. So for what it's worth:

KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX P3200 Film is specially designed to be used as a multi-speed film. The speed you use depends on your application; make tests to determine the appropriate speed.

The nominal speed is EI 1000 when the film is processed in KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX Developer or KODAK PROFESSIONAL T-MAX RS Developer and Replenisher, or EI 800 when it is processed in other Kodak black-and-white developers. It was determined in a manner published in ISO standards. For ease in calculating exposure and for consistency with the commonly used scale of film-speed numbers, the nominal speed has been rounded to EI 800.

Lee

T-Max 3200 processing time exp at 1600

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency