So Juan is there anything we have collectively told you that has given you help or information you did not already know.
pentaxuser
pentaxuser
It seems your shot is an example of a mild push too... One that looks and works fine for overcast... It looks like TMY can't reach normal contrast at 400, but at 200-250-320 in HC110... Isn't it why Kodak went for xtol, after designing Tmax films around d-76? TMY @ 200-250 in d-76 is beautiful... If you ask me, even if some people can prefer your photograph a bit more open tonally, say one or two thirds of stop, or box speed but in a faster developer that reaches box speed, I prefer it the way you made it: it has a lot of character, and in the other case, it would be a little cleaner but it could easily start to wash out and lose personality... Just my opinion, of course... You made a great negative, and also a great print for the subject.That shot was metered at box speed, and developed in replenished HC-110 dilution E. IIRC, I increased my development time by 10%
With MF, one often needs to stop down more than in 135 because a) dof is less at the same apertures and b) lenses are slower. And one might want to use faster shutter speeds, too, if one makes larger prints than one would from 135, but that of course depends also on abilities, ergonomics and stuff.
But that doesn't seem to be the OPs issue.
From the things I just don't understand department:It's a fine shot, Matt, but more to the point is: If she was your model did you pay her enough to replace those torn jeans? I had no idea things were that bad in Canada
pentaxuser
Sure, for years, and today too... I wouldn't be here if not...So Juan is there anything we have collectively told you that has given you help or information you did not already know.
pentaxuser
Hi Sirius... A filter? I don't get it...
I just said I won't need a developer/film for high contrast 'cause I don't photograph under direct sunlight. So all comments should be related to expansion. Thank you!
You seem like being a Photoshop guy!I am looking for a filter that changes overcast skies to nice blue skies with fluffy clouds.
Oh I see. I was thinking of equipment to which the rules of physics apply, not Zeiss lenses.Not a problem with the Hasselblad Zeiss lenses. You must be using inferior equipment.
I think we have a difference in terminology. I don't consider that increase of development to be a "push", but rather an expansion.It seems your shot is an example of a mild push too... One that looks and works fine for overcast... It looks like TMY can't reach normal contrast at 400, but at 200-250-320 in HC110... Isn't it why Kodak went for xtol, after designing Tmax films around d-76? TMY @ 200-250 in d-76 is beautiful... If you ask me, even if some people can prefer your photograph a bit more open tonally, say one or two thirds of stop, or box speed but in a faster developer that reaches box speed, I prefer it the way you made it: it has a lot of character, and in the other case, it would be a little cleaner but it could easily start to wash out and lose personality... Just my opinion, of course... You made a great negative, and also a great print for the subject.
I have read, through the years, two or three comments here at Photrio, about D400 being better for 800 than TMY2... I'm sure about that... Maybe those members will chime in... Definitely TMY2 is slower than D400.
You seem like being a Photoshop guy!
Sorry, you just made it easy.
I am looking for a filter that changes overcast skies to nice blue skies with fluffy clouds.
Oh I see. I was thinking of equipment to which the rules of physics apply, not Zeiss lenses.
An absolute pleasure, Matt! Remarkable!!!I think we have a difference in terminology. I don't consider that increase of development to be a "push", but rather an expansion.
My replenished HC-110 dilution E gave me box speed consistently. All I needed to do was fine tune the development time to give me the normal contrast I prefer.
I decided to increase the development slightly for those rolls because of the diffused nature of the light that day.
In more recent times I've transitioned to replenished X-Tol, but as I still have some HC-110 replenisher, I leave open the option of using replenished HC-110 again.
Here is another photo which was coincidentally shot at the same location several years later. TMY again, and still replenished HC-110 dil E, but the light is distinctly different - open sky here, but otherwise sun and cloud - so I relied on adjusting contrast at the printing stage. The metering was keyed carefully to the highlights.
This is a scan from the negative. The prints are slightly lower key, and toned using brown toner.
View attachment 244520
Thanks Juan, but that particular example didn't involve any expansion.There's an example there (post #35) with one of the best tones for expansion I've seen, ever... It's TMY2... It's not easy to do it, IMO, that well...
Matt, I don't know if you mean yours or the woman's shot, is not an expansion... But I think you're right about language getting in the middle... When I say that image is an expansion (the woman) I mean a low contrast scene (not direct sun) was expanded, to make its tones separated... Light was flat, and the image is not... Then we can decide how much of the shadows we keep or not: in the case of low contrast scenes, losing a bit of the shadows is not visually uncomfortable as it indeed happens when we lose shadow detail in a direct sun shot because of a wrong EI, that's ugly... Finally it's the images what matters, and yours are great... Perhaps my words are so-so... I know your tools shot had efficient printing work obviously, but hey, it was very well exposed and very well developed too...Thanks Juan, but that particular example didn't involve any expansion.
It was metered at box speed and developed normally.
What I did do was emphasize the highlights when I took my meter reading, knowing that with TMY if I gave the highlights generous exposure, the shadows would fall naturally.
The pleasing contrast comes from the printing/post processing choices.
Not in my experience.TMY2 is close to 200 and that's why its grain is well below other ISO400 B&W films
So, I say the film's close to 200, and you say it's 250... Aren't we saying exactly exactly the same?Not in my experience.
TMY-2 is a robust ISO 400 film. If you evaluate it using Zone system rather than ISO methods, it will measure out at an EI that is 2/3 of a stop less, just like just about all other films, due to the differences between how ISO speeds and Zone system speeds are determined.
ISO speed ratings tend to result in better machine or lab prints than Zone system speed ratings.
No, because you are saying that it is slower than other ISO 400 films.So, I say the film's close to 200, and you say it's 250... Aren't we saying exactly exactly the same?
Tmax400Hello, I just got enough TMY for my rangefinders and Hasselblad, and enough FX-39 for a couple of years too... So, that'll be my road now...
That's what I prefer for 35mm: sharp grain.
I'm not sure if TMY/FX-39 in 120, will imply too little grain compared to my 35mm prints, because I haven't used MF TMY in fx-39 yet...
I guess I have four main options:
TMY @ 400, TMY @ 800, Delta @ 400, and Delta @ 800. That, leaving traditional films alone, and I'm not sure about that either, being MF...
I have very little experience with handheld 120, and, contrary to my stopped-down 35mm shooting, I plan to use my 6x6 at 1/250 and 1/500, and just set f-stop...
And, I have zero experience printing handheld 120... So I'll just take your words and advice without saying a word: I just know nothing about this...
All I imagine, but I could be in a huge mistake, is Delta400 might be a bit faster than TMY and possibly it has a little more grain: perhaps both facts can serve me well for more visible sharp grain in 120...
So, not sure about which film, and not sure if pushing or not... I'm sure about seeking sharp grain, and about not using direct sunlight...
What would you try? Thanks!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?