TMAX 400 vs Delta 400

[138S]

That's an extremely misleading and condescending comment.

I shoot in the UK as well as Turkey and Greece, Surprisingly in Turkey/Greece I have no issues with highlights, shadows etc even with marble around, and that's been with Tmax100 & 400, Delta 100 & 400 and also HP5. Now the light is usually excellent in Turkey.Greece very intense sunlight but there's also so much light bouncing about that shadows aren't deep and normal exposure and development is all that's required.

Ironically it's the sunlight in the UK that's tends to be harsher and there's a greater difference between highlights and shadows particularly in the Spring, Autumn and Winter when the sun's quite low anyway and there's less overall light bouncing around so the opposite of your comment. Of course it's different on overcast days anywhere.

Ian, that image has no strong highlights, it has a moderate SBR, beyond compressed shadows under bridge, there are no glares or shines, if you placed the shadow of the front rock at -1 then the rest of the terrain is at +2.

Highlights I was speaking are beyond +3.

Those extreme highlights can be important in an studio protrait, for exampe, when when wanting texture in the glares that show face volumes.

 

[Ian Grant]

I can assure you the image has very strong highlights the sun reflecting off marble, one of the benefits of Pyro developers is they are tamed, this was Delta 100 in Pyrocat HD.

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

Try photographing at high altitude for a few decades like I've done. That certainly separates the men from the boys when it comes to film curve linearity and shadow reproduction. Think of rendering, in direct sunlight, deep shadow pits and texture on black volcanic rocks immediately adjacent to glistening, sparkling specular highlights on snow, ice, or white glacial polished granite. Not a hypothetical. Easy if you have the right film, impossible if you're carrying the wrong one. Depends on the curve. Simply "minus" or "pull" developing the film doesn't do the same thing, and in fact, ends up compressing, smashing together, all the delicate microtonality you are after in the first place.

 

[138S]

Peak grain is in the skies when there are not enough clouds to make them interesting (insert smiley face that means you know what I'm saying is painfully true).

Bill, of course perceived grain depends mainly on local microcontrast, there is lilttle to debate about that, I guess. Microcontrast hides grain to human eye.

But the grain perception is also related to density, we have Diffuse Granularity graphs depending on exposure and correlating to density:

This is for color, but similar for BW:

 

[138S]

I can assure you the image has very strong highlights the sun reflecting off marble, one of the benefits of Pyro developers is they are tamed, this was Delta 100 in Pyrocat HD.

Ian

Ian, is this an scan of the negative or an scan of the print?

I never had a problem when scanning and digital editing an image... but I've still have to learn a lot before I can optically print highlights like I want !

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, is this an scan of the negative or an scan of the print?

I never had a problem when scanning and digital editing an image... but I've still have to learn a lot before I can optically print highlights like I want !

This exists as a print "4"x20", I can print highlightsto achieve what I'm after in many ways, this one was quite a straight print just a slight burning in of the sky.

Ian

 

[MattKing]

TMax RS is not discontued

Unfortunately, it seems that it is.
The current updated list of Kodak Alaris chemical SKU's no longer lists it: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sit..._Chemical_CATALOG_ITEM_NUMBER_UPDATE_2019.pdf

 

[138S]

Unfortunately, it seems that it is.
The current updated list of Kodak Alaris chemical SKU's no longer lists it: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sit..._Chemical_CATALOG_ITEM_NUMBER_UPDATE_2019.pdf

Matt, TMax RS is not discontinued, also Xtol is not in the list. That list contains products that had Catalog item # changed.

See https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/TMax_RS/Ntt/TMax+RS/N/0 for the 20L they say "more in the way"

What is discontinued (I think) is the 1gal , but not the 20L , see this: https://www.freestylephoto.biz/8446...d-Film-Developer-Replenisher-to-Make-1-Gallon

As RS is usually used in big machines the 1gal makes less sense.

 

[MattKing]

Xtol is not in the list.

X-Tol is on the 4th line from the top.
The Freestyle and other web-page listings are for old stock - Kodak Alaris isn't selling any new T-Max RS.
There may be some distributors who have some stock of the Tetenal (pre-receivership) produced product.
And of course there is always a possibility that Kodak Alaris could re-introduce the product.
The three products whose catalogue numbers aren't changing are listed at the bottom of the second page of that pdf.

 

[braxus]

Since my local London Drugs sells Ilford B&W film, I picked up a roll of Delta 400 (its only a 24 shot roll), and went out for an hour to get some quick a dirty shots around my area. The day was overcast with a touch of rain. So the lighting was flat. I missed out on earlier when the sun was out. Anyway I got a few shots that might be interesting, and I'll get the roll developed and scanned with prints. Since the lab is doing the work, I'll see how well they handle the film. And yes they still use Ilfotek DD, not ID11 like I thought previously.

 

[StepheKoontz]

Since the lab is doing the work, I'll see how well they handle the film.

When a lab is doing your film or prints, you do have a choose a film that a) works well with their process/developer b) comes out like you want. I remember when I shot color neg film, I would pick a film based on the processing/paper the lab used. My local pro lab at the time used very contrasty paper so I gravitated to lower contrast films. The drugstore processing was lower contrast so "consumer" punchy films looked better. It also is going to change depending on if the negs are optically printed or scanned. That is why you really can't get a good consensus asking online, too many variables. And even though I have "favorite films", I sometimes shoot with other films going for a certain look. It's all subjective

 

[braxus]

Yeah. I've learned film choice, developer of choice, time used for developing, scanner used, and finally how its processed in Photoshop- all affect the look of a film. But being Im keeping one thing consistent- the lab using the same developer with recommended times, plus the scanner they use, at least I can see how it looks on their end.

Im interested how Delta 400 will work under overcast flat lighting as well.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Im interested how Delta 400 will work under overcast flat lighting as well.

Without problems, in my experience.

 

[Lachlan Young]

granularity, not a problem in 8x10" negatives , in xtol also not much seen in 6x9cm

sharpness, not a problem in 8x10" negatives

shadow scale adjust with exposure/developer

colour rendition adjust filtration

If a film works for you, great, but don't assume that some facile twiddling will let one film impersonate another - manufacturers ran entire research teams to see what the competition were up to - and if they could have produced a filter that did what you claim, they would have! A Wratten filter is unlikely to do what your assumptions and hypotheses presume - and even hugely expensive custom filters will only cut colour transmission at specified points. If you really wanted to use TMax, you would have learned how to afford it.

I've been wet printing, amateur, since 1985, and I've teached high school students in the basics for two years. I'm not a good photographer.


It depends on the highlights and glares you want print, the SBR and the texture you want. In glasgow you have a soft box in the sky so you don't see much the sun, then you sometimes use an HLM if you need it... so YMMV .

You can speak all the masking/ BTZS acronyms you like, but you've essentially admitted you don't know what they really mean for practical printing purposes - or when not to use them...
And as for your guessing about the negs I was thinking about when I described bringing in highlights, none of them were shot in Scotland, only some of them were processed here. Please take the condescension and ignorance elsewhere.

Have you a doubt that pyro helps to print TMax highlights on VC paper ?

Plenty. Derived from experience of making darkroom prints. Lots and lots of them. Pyrocat etc were specifically formulated so that the colour of stain would have less impact on highlight contrast than PMK etc - the big complaint was that the yellow stain was lowering the contrast and making them mushy. I'm pretty neutral about all the claims about the benefits or otherwise of staining developers, other than it's always been very striking to me that essentially none of the loudest protagonists of stain make particularly big enlargements (4-5x at the outside) - I recall some of them even going as far as to try to say that you shouldn't go much over 5-6x with faster films because the grain gets objectionable. My own taste would tend to say that Ian's image is a little too printed down in the highlights - it feels a little 'dull' compared to the brilliance of the scene - as he says, it's easy enough to tweak.

Look, if you use TMax developer you get this insane sky rocketing in the highlights beyond +3, other developers do it a bit less but anyway you go high in the sky:

You've evidently never had to expand a flat contrast scene to grade 2 in your life. Or any of the other situations where a steep gradient without shouldering is useful.

 

[138S]

If a film works for you, great, but don't assume that some facile twiddling will let one film impersonate another - manufacturers ran entire research teams to see what the competition were up to - and if they could have produced a filter that did what you claim, they would have! A Wratten filter is unlikely to do what your assumptions and hypotheses presume - and even hugely expensive custom filters will only cut colour transmission at specified points. If you really wanted to use TMax, you would have learned how to afford it.

To me it is not about making a film look like another, to me it is about making the shot look like I want, and with each film it requires learning how if works.

For 8x10 I only use HP5. For 4x5 I use HP5, TMX and CMS 20 but I'll try with Delta and FP4 because of cost.

 

[removed account4]

Without problems, in my experience.

+1
just give it enough juice

 

[Bill Burk]

Bill, of course perceived grain depends mainly on local microcontrast, there is lilttle to debate about that, I guess. Microcontrast hides grain to human eye.

But the grain perception is also related to density, we have Diffuse Granularity graphs depending on exposure and correlating to density:

This is for color, but similar for BW:

View attachment 237477

Yes exactly. Skies, with no variation in tone, even though “RMS” granularity is below peak, can appear to be grainy... but as your graph shows the most apparent grain is in low-mid tones. That’s what the picture of my daughter shows, I tried to put the whole picture in the tones that would show grain at its most apparent. And I think the demonstration confirmed what the book told me.

 

[138S]

Yes exactly. Skies, with no variation in tone, even though “RMS” granularity is below peak, can appear to be grainy... but as your graph shows the most apparent grain is in low-mid tones. That’s what the picture of my daughter shows, I tried to put the whole picture in the tones that would show grain at its most apparent. And I think the demonstration confirmed what the book told me.

I also think that grain is a powerful aesthetic resource.

Manufacturers usually don't show those graphs in the datasheets, for BW grain depends on developer/dilution... they say a single value but not showing a graph.

The regular still Ektachrome datasheet does not show the graph, but fortunately it is shown in the Super 8 datasheet:



One thing I do after a film sensitomeric calibration is inspect the patches with a high x magnifier, to figure grain structure at each density.

 

[removed account4]

I also think that grain is a powerful aesthetic resource.

the thing is that when people use tab grain films they are doing their best to abandon grain and go for smooth, cause grainless/smooth is their aesthetic choice.

 

[Lachlan Young]

the thing is that when people use tab grain films they are doing their best to abandon grain and go for smooth, cause grainless/smooth is their aesthetic choice.

Which is a pity because Delta 100 can deliver quite beautiful & extremely sharp grain.

 

[138S]

the thing is that when people use tab grain films they are doing their best to abandon grain and go for smooth, cause grainless/smooth is their aesthetic choice.

Of course, some people hate grain, of simply it's not suitable for his depiction. And in LF grain is a least concern

But obviously we have there an strong aesthetic subculture about grain, many masters have worked with this resource to empower his message !

I guess that mastering grain usage is like diving in a deep ocean, we always can go deeper. There are many nuances... we have grain interaction with tonality, with focus, with bokeh kind, with microcontrast, with format, with processing, with subject...

Of course not always we have to control grain, sometimes it simply makes the job.

Personally, I like a lot TX400 in MF, which I use with smooth bokeh RB67 lenses, I like how the OOF shows more grain from the lower microcontrast, helping to separate subject from backgorund.

 

[Bill Burk]

One thing I do after a film sensitomeric calibration is inspect the patches with a high x magnifier, to figure grain structure at each density.

Oh... enlarge the sensitometry strip to your favorite paper and look at the print. I did that here.

( https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/making-a-zone-ruler.128059/#post-1690380 )

There on my Zone Ruler for Normal... I can see the grain is most apparent at Zone V, VI and VII with the print under normal illumination. In the sun, I can see the grain clearly in Zone IV.

 

[138S]

( https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/making-a-zone-ruler.128059/#post-1690380 )

Bill, this is an excellent precedure for integral process calibration.

Let me ask, in practice...

How do you correlate the spot meter reading to the exposure on film ?

Directly assuming the meter is aiming Z-V at calibrated speed ?

Or you make the optical calculation ?

 

[removed account4]

Which is a pity because Delta 100 can deliver quite beautiful & extremely sharp grain.

i know
people get caught up in what they like and they like what they get caught up in
grainless is OK i guess but too clinical for my tastes ..
have fun!

Of course, some people hate grain, of simply it's not suitable for his depiction. And in LF grain is a least concern

But obviously we have there an strong aesthetic subculture about grain, many masters have worked with this resource to empower his message !

I guess that mastering grain usage is like diving in a deep ocean, we always can go deeper. There are many nuances... we have grain interaction with tonality, with focus, with bokeh kind, with microcontrast, with format, with processing, with subject...

Of course not always we have to control grain, sometimes it simply makes the job.

Personally, I like a lot TX400 in MF, which I use with smooth bokeh RB67 lenses, I like how the OOF shows more grain from the lower microcontrast, helping to separate subject from backgorund.

that's kind of heavy. masters ?
i don't worry about any of .., aesthetic subcultures, tonality micro contrast ...
large format, meidum, small, none of it really matters at this point,
its better just to do what you want and not worry what club one is a member of.
besides if there is a club that wants me for a member, i probably don't want to be in the club.

YMMV

 

[Bill Burk]

Bill, this is an excellent precedure for integral process calibration.

Let me ask, in practice...

How do you correlate the spot meter reading to the exposure on film ?

Directly assuming the meter is aiming Z-V at calibrated speed ?

Or you make the optical calculation ?

I take the same chips and tape them to the spotmeter.