TMY in PyrocatMC

haryanto · Nov 23, 2006

I just shoot a few sheet 4x5 TMY in PyrocatMC, semistand dev (18 minutes, agitations first minute, and per 6 minute for 10s), use PVC tube vertical, in enlarging 30x40cm, grain very visible, this not happened when I used TMX or FP4, any thoughts about this? (this is first time I use TMY in PyrocatMC)

thanks before

sanking · Nov 23, 2006

haryanto said:
I just shoot a few sheet 4x5 TMY in PyrocatMC, semistand dev (18 minutes, agitations first minute, and per 6 minute for 10s), use PVC tube vertical, in enlarging 30x40cm, grain very visible, this not happened when I used TMX or FP4, any thoughts about this? (this is first time I use TMY in PyrocatMC)

thanks before

I believe TMY does have more pronounced grain that the modern TMX, and it surely has a lot more than FP4+. On the other hand, I have not noticed any grain in prints up to 15X21" made from 5X7 TMY negatives developed in Pyrocat-MC.

Note that the appearance of grain can be made worse by both over-exposure and over-develoment.

Sandy

Tom Hoskinson · Nov 23, 2006

I believe that the silver grains Kodak puts into TMY are substantially larger than the silver grains Kodak puts into TMX.

I develop both TMY and TMX in Pyrocat MC. I do not find the TMY grain noticeable in contact prints made from my TMY 4x5 negs. The grain is noticeable - but not objectionable - in my 35mm TMY negs.

If I want grainless 35mm negs, I shoot TMX

Luc Cultor · Nov 23, 2006

30x40cm from 4x5in is about 3X enlargement, no? That's a lot of grain! I have many 8x10 prints from 35mm TMY negs that don't show grain, and that's enlarged 10X!

Cheers!

sanking · Nov 23, 2006

Luc Cultor said:
30x40cm from 4x5in is about 3X enlargement, no? That's a lot of grain! I have many 8x10 prints from 35mm TMY negs that don't show grain, and that's enlarged 10X!

Cheers!

Yes, to have objectionable grain from a 3X enlargement is surprising. That is basically the same magnification I have in making a 15X21 print from a 5X7" negative, and my prints of this size from TMY negatives are virtually grain free. Which makes me suspect that there is some over-exposure or over-development involved, both of which will increase the appearance of grain.

On the other hand, development conditions that favor accutance and enhance sharpness also favor more pronounced grain, so perhaps in this case the stand development is in part contibuting to the grain.

Sandy King

gainer · Nov 23, 2006

When the Kodak manufacturing facility was changed some years ago, it was found that in fact the grain of the new TMY was coarser than that of the new Tri-X.
Your semi-stand time of 18 minutes seems short to me. You don't say what dilution you used. Some years ago I found that 18 minutes of stand development corresponded to 12 minutes of development with agitation on the minute, but that development was inevitably uneven. Later I found that my developers were much too strong and that more dilute developer gave no noticable unevenness. Someties uneven development can look like or in fact cause more graininess. You might try a test using the same dilution with 12 minutes and agitation for 10 seconds every minute.

I have not used TMY lately, but I would think that dilution that would bring HP5+ or even FP4+ up to normal contrast with semi-stand development of less than 24 minutes is somewhat too strong.

skahde · Nov 24, 2006

gainer said:
When the Kodak manufacturing facility was changed some years ago, it was found that in fact the grain of the new TMY was coarser than that of the new Tri-X.

I tried to redo the experiment from the article and developed Tri-X400, TMY-old and TMY-new in Kodak D76 1+1 to the same CI in a Durst Filmetta. There was no difference between TMY old and new besides a 10% difference in dev. time needed. Tri-X had a bit coarser and sharper grain. This exactly matches what Kodak says about the garnularity and difference between the old an new films.

I don't now what they did in that article but as long as nobody is able to succesfully redo it (the gold-standard of any scientific result) I'd say they simply mixed up the samples they got back from the lab where they had them developed.

If anyone is interested I could upload my samples in the tech-gallery.

Stefan

Tom Hoskinson · Nov 25, 2006

skahde said:
I tried to redo the experiment from the article and developed Tri-X400, TMY-old and TMY-new in Kodak D76 1+1 to the same CI in a Durst Filmetta. There was no difference between TMY old and new besides a 10% difference in dev. time needed. Tri-X had a bit coarser and sharper grain. This exactly matches what Kodak says about the garnularity and difference between the old an new films.

I don't now what they did in that article but as long as nobody is able to succesfully redo it (the gold-standard of any scientific result) I'd say they simply mixed up the samples they got back from the lab where they had them developed.

If anyone is interested I could upload my samples in the tech-gallery.

Stefan

Sounds like a reasonable explanation, Stefan; i.e., "I'd say they simply mixed up the samples they got back from the lab where they had them developed."

For Kodak's current take on TMAX granularity, See Kodak's F-4026 tech pub on the Kodak website.

TMAX 100 Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 8 (extremely fine).

TMAX 400 Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 10 (extremely fine).

For TRi-X granularity, See Kodak's F-9 tech pub.

TRi-X Pan TX: Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 17 (fine).

TRi-X Pan Professional TXP, TXT: Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 16 (fine).

For comparison see Kodak tech pub P-255:
For Kodak Tech Pan developed in HC-110 (Dilution D) the Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 8 (extremely fine).

For Kodak Tech Pan developed in Technidol Liquid the Diffuse rms Granularity is given by Kodak as 5 (Micro fine).

haryanto · Nov 28, 2006

Many Thanks for Reply, sorry for my long reply because I've just comeback from field to make some test in TMY, has not develop it yet, I'm Just Curious that when I used 120mm format TMY in Pyrocat MC I didn't see grain in 8x10 enlargement

I'll back if I had the result from my recent test

thanks again

haryanto · Nov 30, 2006

gainer said:
When the Kodak manufacturing facility was changed some years ago, it was found that in fact the grain of the new TMY was coarser than that of the new Tri-X.
Your semi-stand time of 18 minutes seems short to me. You don't say what dilution you used. Some years ago I found that 18 minutes of stand development corresponded to 12 minutes of development with agitation on the minute, but that development was inevitably uneven. Later I found that my developers were much too strong and that more dilute developer gave no noticable unevenness. Someties uneven development can look like or in fact cause more graininess. You might try a test using the same dilution with 12 minutes and agitation for 10 seconds every minute.

I have not used TMY lately, but I would think that dilution that would bring HP5+ or even FP4+ up to normal contrast with semi-stand development of less than 24 minutes is somewhat too strong.

Pat, my late test with TMY is, use dilution 1:4:100 Pyrocat MC, at , (I use Sodium Carbonate for B Solutions 250gr / litre) develop in 18 minutes, 5 minutes pre soak, 1 minutes initial agitation, and every 3 minutes 10 second agitations for TMY EI320

I got good result for shadow and highlight (didn't test it with densitometer, i dont have)

but still pronounced grain, very visible at enlargement 30x40,
maybe something wrong with my film, I keep in refrigerator, and still have expired date at 2008

thanks for you all

TMY in PyrocatMC

Inactive

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency