Tmax Developer

I recently started to use Tmax P3200 souped in Kodak's Tmax developer @ 1:4 dilution.

I have been pleasantly surprised by the impressive amount of shadow detail this combo produces, but grain is quite heavy. I know that P3200 is quite grainy, but I was achieving finer grain, when I was using Diafine. But Diafine wasn't giving me quite as much shadow detail as the Tmax developer. It's a catch 22.

So, I was curious what my options are with the Tmax developer.

Will a change in dillution effect the appearance of grain? Perhaps going to 1:9 instead of 1:4?

Can I add a silver solvent to the Tmax developer? I seem to remember some people adding a pinch of a certain chemical to Rodinal for this reason.


Thanks,

HL

The best developer for T-MAX 3.200 is Tetenal ULTRAFIN, both when it comes to grain and shadow details.

j-fr

www.j-fr.dk

Usually, when you increase dilution of the dev, you increase the grain; D-76 1+0 has fine grain, D-76, 1+3 has coaser grain.

I suppose sodium sulfite can be added to T-Max dev as it is often added to rodinal to smaooth out the grain. I forget the amount of sulfite/liter for Rodinal, but it works and you can certainly try a test roll with T-Max and P3200.

The most commonly grain reducing agent added to Rodinal has traditionally been sodium sulfite. The most commonly used amount I've seen was 45 grams/liter of working solution. Recently, sodium ascorbate (vitamin C) has been suggested for a similar effect by Patrick Gainer. That's at a rate of 4 grams of sodium ascorbate per liter of 1:50 working dilution, and times adjusted to the suggested 1:25 dilution times because of the superadditive effect of the sodium ascorbate. I find that the addition of sodium ascorbate brings Rodinal back to near box speed with the films I've tried.

This says nothing about what effect you'd get with either additive in TMAX developer.

Lee

I wouldn't add anything to Tmax Developer, just use a different developer. Try Xtol, it produces good shadow detail and finer grain than Tmax developer, but my personal opinion is that the midtone gradation isn't as good as with Tmax.

Thank you gents.

I have some sodium sulfite at home and will try an experiment or two.

Aside from the grain, I have to say that I was impressed by the noticeable push in the shadows that the TMAX developer produced. Very nice and more than I am accustomed to seeing from the same film in DD-X.

Yes grain increases, but so does accutance in general with diluted developers.

C

[I have been pleasantly surprised by the impressive amount of shadow detail this combo produces, but grain is quite heavy. I know that P3200 is quite grainy, but I was achieving finer grain, when I was using Diafine. But Diafine wasn't giving me quite as much shadow detail as the Tmax developer. It's a catch 22.

[/QUOTE]

What ISO are you using with Diafine? Diafine does not give the same speed to T films as it does to older emulsions. I would Tmax 3200 at 800.

I was shooting P3200 @ 1250 for Diafine. Looked pretty good. One nice thing about using Diafine was that the highlights were smoother, due to the nature of a 2-bath developer.

chriscrawfordphoto said:

I wouldn't add anything to Tmax Developer, just use a different developer. Try Xtol, it produces good shadow detail and finer grain than Tmax developer, but my personal opinion is that the midtone gradation isn't as good as with Tmax.

Click to expand...

If you want more midtone contrast from Xtol, develop longer.

This is REALLY easy folks.

OR, you can increase the dilution of TMAX developer,
increase the time. Reduce the agitation if you need to reduce highlight density.
The process of tuning a film and developer is the same whether it it EI 25, or 25,000.

Actually I like my negs nice and flat. I add the contrast, when I scan and print.

I could use Xtol. I even have a bag sitting in the cupboard right now. But at the moment I really don't want to juggle 5 liters of developer, in addition to everything else that is in my lab (bathroom). The other problem is that for some reason distilled water is difficult to come by here in merry old England and in the past I have had problems with Xtol and my tap water (to much iron / metal?).

Also according to Kodak the TMAX developer produces more shadow detail than Xtol. After seeing the past 8 rolls of P3200 in TMAX Dev. I'm starting to believe that, that isn't just marketing hype.

I would go back to DD-X, which was a nice compromise between Tmax and Xtol, but for the past year I've had a very difficult time with it. I used DD-X for the past few years as my main developer and suddenly it's failing on me left and right. I've lost too many rolls of important material to continue to take the risk.

Harry

You can dilute T Max developer, like HC-110 or Rodinal, and slow the process.
THAT means that you can link the highlight density to agitation.
You can balance the development time (which places the shadows)
with the agitation (which places the highlights).

The biggest influence of 'bad grain' is from too much contrast & over development.
If you can reduce the development, you'll reduce the appearance of grain.

Here is an overlay of Kodak's curve set of Xtol 1+1 (in red) over the Tmax developer curves.
It shows pretty clearly that Xtol (1+1) gives a higher shadow speed that TMAX,
which translates as shadow detail. You can find the Xtol data at:

http://wwwfr.kodak.com/AT/plugins/acrobat/de/professional/xtolEntwickler.pdf

The curves are at the end of the document.

D-76 1+1 will give the same speed as TMax developer, but a less contrasty image. Look at the TMZ pdf from Kodak to compare D-76 and TMax developer.

thanks for the chart