Tmax P3200 in HC-110 Dilution H?

[Kyle M.]

I have one roll of the current version of Tmax P3200. I don't even recall how I acquired it but I just came across it in the fridge. Thinking about shooting it in the next few days, probably at ISO 800. Has anybody ever successfully developed this film in HC-110 dilution H? Or should I stick to Dilution B? Dilution H has always been my go to with HC-110 because it's kind of pricey and I don't mind the longer times. But I've been using Obsidian Aqua for the past 3 years and I forgot I even had some HC-110 hidden away so B is doable. I don't even know what kind of starting time to shoot for if I were to use the Obsidian Aqua.

 

[markjwyatt]

Secret Santa just gave me two rolls of P3200. Since secret Santa inquired through inside sources I was expecting this (I expected one roll), so I did some research and HC110 works pretty well according to this article. Since HC110 is what I have, I will try it. The author shot a ISO 800, but I am thinking to go straight to 3200.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

The best developer for Tmax 3200 is Tmax Developer. Tmax 3200 is not really a 3200 speed film, It is a 1000 speed film, designed to be pushed to 3200. It achieves this be being a rather low contrast film when developed for its normal speed, so the contrast build-up from pushing gives contrast that is about normal. Unfortunately, most developers give poor shadow detail when pushing this film. I have not tried HC-110, but I can tell you from experience that D-76 gave horrid results. If you want the best results from this, buy a bottle of Tmax Developer, or to save money, get the Freestyle version, which is called Lmax. It is identical to Tmax Developer; I have directly compared them.

 

[markjwyatt]

The best developer for Tmax 3200 is Tmax Developer. Tmax 3200 is not really a 3200 speed film, It is a 1000 speed film, designed to be pushed to 3200. It achieves this be being a rather low contrast film when developed for its normal speed, so the contrast build-up from pushing gives contrast that is about normal. Unfortunately, most developers give poor shadow detail when pushing this film. I have not tried HC-110, but I can tell you from experience that D-76 gave horrid results. If you want the best results from this, buy a bottle of Tmax Developer, or to save money, get the Freestyle version, which is called Lmax. It is identical to Tmax Developer; I have directly compared them.

The author of the article I posted started his comments about P3200 in D-76 with this (consistent with your thoughts):

"There’s ugly and then there’s ugly,..."

TMax developer or equivalent is probably the best route...

 

[Kyle M.]

I’ll probably just use HC-110 Dilution B even though it uses a lot more developer than dilution H. I can’t see myself buying a bottle of tmax developer for one roll of film. It seems like people are getting good results HC-110. I’ve been using tmax 100 and 400 for almost 8 years originally in D76, then Rodinal, and finally HC-110 with good results not sure how the 3200 will fair.

But now that I’ve switched to my home mixed obsidian aqua it’s hard to find times for anything over 400 ISO since it’s primarily a sheet film developer.

 

[MattKing]

You will need to use at least 6 ml of HC-110 syrup no matter what dilution you use.
If you are prepared to use continuous rotary agitation - tipping your tank on its side and rolling it back and forth - you might be able to get away with 192 ml of dilution B or even 96 ml of dilution A (depending on what reels and tanks are being used).

 

[Kyle M.]

You will need to use at least 6 ml of HC-110 syrup no matter what dilution you use.
If you are prepared to use continuous rotary agitation - tipping your tank on its side and rolling it back and forth - you might be able to get away with 192 ml of dilution B or even 96 ml of dilution A (depending on what reels and tanks are being used).

That's a non issue as Dilution H (1+63) in my tank is approximately 8ml of syrup, 500ml. I just prefer to use dilution H as it's more economical and HC-110 isn't cheap. But since nobody seems to have used dilution H for P3200 and dilution B seems rather popular I'll just give that a go. I've been told not to use Rodinal as I'll lose shadow detail, though I don't know if that's true or not. I've used Rodinal in the past with Tmax 100 and 400 and was very happy with it. But as I only have this one roll to experiment with and I can't see myself shooting much P3200 when I normally shoot Ilford Pan F and Tmax 100 I'll just stick to something that's known to work.

Though some people out there will kick and scream about how it's unreliable and doesn't work I've developed probably 50 rolls of film in Rodinal 1:100 stand developed for 1 hour. I've never had bad results regardless of film. I may even go that route. I'm certainly not going to use this experimental roll for anything important.

 

[wyofilm]

Though some people out there will kick and scream about how it's unreliable and doesn't work I've developed probably 50 rolls of film in Rodinal 1:100 stand developed for 1 hour. I've never had bad results regardless of film. I may even go that route. I'm certainly not going to use this experimental roll for anything important.

As someone who uses semi-stand on occasion with Rodinal, I will tell you that I did this with Ilford's delta 3200 once. It was awful: the largest grain I've ever seen. That put me of using delta 3200 until recently.

 

[MattKing]

But since nobody seems to have used dilution H for P3200 and dilution B seems rather popular I'll just give that a go.

With respect to popularity, this might have something to do with the fact that dilution H is entirely unofficial - Kodak never prescribed a 1 + 63 dilution, and all experiments with it are relatively ad-hoc and not "scientifically" tested.
In contrast, dilution B has probably the most testing behind it.
The various dilutions of HC-110 were originally designed to mimic the behavior of different developers in common commercial (usually lab) use. There was no commercial equivalent to a 1 + 63 dilution.
When using HC-110 I tend to mostly use what to all intents and purposes is dilution E - 1 + 47 - but I round it up to 1 + 49 for ease of calculation. However for the last few years of regularly using HC-110, I used it in a replenishment regime.
I haven't used HC-110 with P3200.

 

[pentaxuser]

That's a non issue as Dilution H (1+63) in my tank is approximately 8ml of syrup, 500ml. I just prefer to use dilution H as it's more economical and HC-110 isn't cheap. But since nobody seems to have used dilution H for P3200 and dilution B seems rather popular I'll just give that a go. I've been told not to use Rodinal as I'll lose shadow detail, though I don't know if that's true or not. I've used Rodinal in the past with Tmax 100 and 400 and was very happy with it. But as I only have this one roll to experiment with and I can't see myself shooting much P3200 when I normally shoot Ilford Pan F and Tmax 100 I'll just stick to something that's known to work.

Though some people out there will kick and scream about how it's unreliable and doesn't work I've developed probably 50 rolls of film in Rodinal 1:100 stand developed for 1 hour. I've never had bad results regardless of film. I may even go that route. I'm certainly not going to use this experimental roll for anything important.

What!! A hundred rolls of Stand and no bad results. God clearly had mercy on your soul and additionally blessed you with the luck of the Devil Or so some will say

On a more serious note I am trying to get to the bottom of the pitfalls said to be associated with Stand and I am still scratching my head so any info is useful.

Was this pure Stand as in pour in, leave and then empty an hour later or was there some agitation involved? If so, what was it?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Kyle,
Chris recommended TMaxDev because you'd be happier with it: one thing that surprised me was it lasts for several years: divide it in a few smaller bottles totally full, with no air at all... It's a very stable syrup that will give you full speed -and more- with all three TMax films... It was designed for pushing, so apart from being the best developer for TMax3200, it will let you use TMax400 at different EI's... One of the best developers I've used.
Bye.

 

[KenR]

Coincidently, I just processed a roll of Tmax3200 shot at ISO 1600 with HC110 1:31 for 9.25 minutes at 68 degrees. The grain is prominent, but I wouldn't say not horrible. The question is, would it be better to shoot Tmax400 pushed to 1600?

 

[pentaxuser]

The question is, would it be better to shoot Tmax400 pushed to 1600?

Now that Ken and its twin question of better to shoot HP5+ at 1600 instead of Tmax3200 are both very interesting. In these times of winter and being confined to the house because of Covid -19 i have seen quire a few YouTube videos of varying quality about P3200 v D3200 or HP5+ v Tri-X but if anyone can point me in the direction of videos that cover D3200 v HP5+ at 1600 and the likes of Tmax 400 v P3200 at 1600 I'd be very grateful

I think I have time on my side as I have a feeling that in U.K. matters of isolation with Covid 19, my confinement will not be relaxed for some weeks to come at best

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[markjwyatt]

Now that Ken and its twin question of better to shoot HP5+ at 1600 instead of Tmax3200 are both very interesting. In these times of winter and being confined to the house because of Covid -19 i have seen quire a few YouTube videos of varying quality about P3200 v D3200 or HP5+ v Tri-X but if anyone can point me in the direction of videos that cover D3200 v HP5+ at 1600 and the likes of Tmax 400 v P3200 at 1600 I'd be very grateful

I think I have time on my side as I have a feeling that in U.K. matters of isolation with Covid 19, my confinement will not be relaxed for some weeks to come at best

Thanks

pentaxuser

I see a lot of internet reviews saying it is better to push Tri-X/HP5 and/or use TMAX developer (with P3200).

The Darkroom Lab compared TMAX P3200 vs. Ilford Delta 3200, and seemed to prefer TMAX P3200. The Darkroom uses dip tanks and DDX.

 

[pentaxuser]

I see a lot of internet reviews saying it is better to push Tri-X/HP5 and/or use TMAX developer (with P3200).

The Darkroom Lab compared TMAX P3200 vs. Ilford Delta 3200, and seemed to prefer TMAX P3200. The Darkroom uses dip tanks and DDX.

Thanks I too have seen a number of videos comparing Tmax 3200 to D3200 but while I too have seen the same sentiment as you mention being expressed on the internet and possibly even here I haven't come across a decent actual comparison of D3200 v HP5+ both at the same speed of 1600 nor of the same comparison between Tmax 400 and Tmax 3200 both at the same speed of 1600. That's what I'd really like to see as no doubt would Ken, based on his posting

pentaxuser

 

[john_s]

Thanks I too have seen a number of videos comparing Tmax 3200 to D3200 but while I too have seen the same sentiment as you mention being expressed on the internet and possibly even here I haven't come across a decent actual comparison of D3200 v HP5+ both at the same speed of 1600 nor of the same comparison between Tmax 400 and Tmax 3200 both at the same speed of 1600. That's what I'd really like to see as no doubt would Ken, based on his posting

pentaxuser

The 400 film developed to 1600 will have finer grain than the "3200" film developed to 1600 but more contrast. If high contrast is an acceptable tradeoff then it's the better choice.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Ken, Pentax,
I've found the best options for 1600 are HP5+ in Microphen or DD-X, and TMY-2 in FX-39 or TMaxDev... These two options are just a little contrasty but not too much, and both have decent grain in case you don't like big grain...
D3200 and TMZ have great clean tone at 1600, but grain is big always... Both are good for two levels of grainy look prints.
That makes me think (just my way of seeing the subject) ISO3200 films make sense for EI3200 and EI6400 only... Best speed and tone, but we pay the grain price...
But: D3200 in 120 doesn't mean huge grain when wet printed...
And: most internet comparisons come from negative scans that make grain look a lot bigger than when wet printed...
Finally, TMZ has a type of grain that's not only smaller than the grain of D3200, but also tighter and more equalized and organized, so, for 35mm, TMZ makes more sense at 1600 than D3200 at 1600, if you want a look with beautiful sharp grain that's not huge... TMY-2 at 1600 for a more contrasty tone.
By the way, I think once I found TMY-2 has more fine detail and resolving power than HP5+ when both were used at 1600.

 

[Kyle M.]

I ended up shooting it at 800 and using HC-110 dilution B, 8.5 minutes @ 68 degrees. It looks pretty good, I wouldn’t say the grain is any more prominent than with Tri-X. I don’t think it’s something I’m going to run out and buy. But if I ever needed anything faster than Tri-X is a viable option. I don’t mess with pushing or pulling and always shot box speed. I also mainly shoot ISO 100 films in daylight. So this really isn’t my thing.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

For reference: 120 Delta 3200 w/ yellow filter (so metered @ 1600)
HC-110 1+31 (Dil. B) for 14:30 (I used the published times for Ilfotec HC)
YMMV



Edit: And just because I'm scanning...
120 Tmax400 @ 400 no filter
Homebrew Rodinal 1+50 14:00
YMMV



PS: For the trifecta
120 Tmax100 @ 100 no filter
Xtol 1+1 10:00
YMMV

 

[pentaxuser]

I ended up shooting it at 800 and using HC-110 dilution B, 8.5 minutes @ 68 degrees. It looks pretty good, I wouldn’t say the grain is any more prominent than with Tri-X. I don’t think it’s something I’m going to run out and buy.

Certainly for 800 TMY-2 400 wins the day every time for me I shot it at 800 and developed for the same time as for 400 and it came out great. TMY-2 is the kind of film that there would appear to be no downside to making 800 as the default speed setting and given its fine grain I suspect it is the kind of film that at 1600 would certainly be preferable to P3200 rated at 1600. Pure speculation on my part, of course as I have never used TMY at 1600

pentaxuser

 

[Kyle M.]

Certainly for 800 TMY-2 400 wins the day every time for me I shot it at 800 and developed for the same time as for 400 and it came out great. TMY-2 is the kind of film that there would appear to be no downside to making 800 as the default speed setting and given its fine grain I suspect it is the kind of film that at 1600 would certainly be preferable to P3200 rated at 1600. Pure speculation on my part, of course as I have never used TMY at 1600

That's not the point. I don't regularly shoot at such high ISO's 99.9% of my shooting is done with 100 ISO film. But I somehow acquired this one roll of P3200 and I don't know how. The idea was to shoot it at it's actual speed and develop using something I had on hand rather than spend money on another developer to develop one roll of film that I'll likely never shoot again.

 

[pentaxuser]

Kyle, you are quite right to point out to me that my post was not the point. I was merely doing what tends to happen on this forum or indeed any forum, namely contributing to "thread drift" I have looked back over the posts and it is difficult to determine where the drift began. You might reasonably argue that I had made a good stab at starting/perpetuating drift when I asked about your successful experience with Rodinal Stand which you had mentioned. I am still interested in the details of this in terms your agitation in many successful stand instances should you wish to reply.

However back to your point. I now realise that you had made several clear references in your replies that the thread was drifting. You had a clear and simple question about what was a one-off situation concerning P3200, two possible dilutions of HC 110, one of which you had hoped to use if possible. Anything else was just a distraction quite rightly. On the basis of this simple question I had no right to even post, never having used HC 110

This thread was clearly not a bar room chat of the kind that inevitably drifts and your #18 really made it clear that it should have been the end of the thread.

It is not always easy to know how narrow an answer is required but in this case it was clearly a question of: I am at place A and need a direct route to place B rather than one of: I am at place A and am interested in finding out about lots of places I might one day want to get to

I have noted this. However a short reply to my #10 would be welcome if you can

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Kyle M.]

Kyle, you are quite right to point out to me that my post was not the point. I was merely doing what tends to happen on this forum or indeed any forum, namely contributing to "thread drift" I have looked back over the posts and it is difficult to determine where the drift began. You might reasonably argue that I had made a good stab at starting/perpetuating drift when I asked about your successful experience with Rodinal Stand which you had mentioned. I am still interested in the details of this in terms your agitation in many successful stand instances should you wish to reply.

However back to your point. I now realise that you had made several clear references in your replies that the thread was drifting. You had a clear and simple question about what was a one-off situation concerning P3200, two possible dilutions of HC 110, one of which you had hoped to use if possible. Anything else was just a distraction quite rightly. On the basis of this simple question I had no right to even post, never having used HC 110

This thread was clearly not a bar room chat of the kind that inevitably drifts and your #18 really made it clear that it should have been the end of the thread.

It is not always easy to know how narrow an answer is required but in this case it was clearly a question of: I am at place A and need a direct route to place B rather than one of: I am at place A and am interested in finding out about lots of places I might one day want to get to

I have noted this. However a short reply to my #10 would be welcome if you can

Thanks

pentaxuser

Sorry about that stand developing question. I thought replied to that but apparently not.
I use rodinal 1:100 at 68 degrees. 30 seconds of initial agitation followed by 1 hour of sitting. I used to agitate at 30 minutes but it never seemed to make a difference so I stopped doing it.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Kyle and that's an interesting point about the 30 min agitation being abandoned because it made no difference to the end result. I read your post on the thread about double loading of 120m films and you mention minimum quantities of Rodinal there of 5ml I take it that for Stand you use the same amount namely, 5ml?

Thanks

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I'd just like to add in the past I stand developed possibly a hundred rolls of different brands and ISOs in Rodinal, using 4-8 ml, pure stand and semistand, and I never got uneven development, bromide drag or anything... Never. I used Agfa Rodinal and Adox Adonal only... I stopped using Rodinal because of its speed loss and its darker midtones, but the commonly mentioned uneven development just never happened, as some other forum members say. And I use plastic reels.