What's your preferred EI for TMax100 in D-76?

[MultiFormat Shooter]

My question is: since EI64 is basically a pull processing, shouldn't it require less time than EI100?

Yes, it should, all else being equal. The information on the Massive Development Chart is "all over the place." Those with way more darkroom experience, than I have, may be able to give a correct time for D76 1:1.

 

[Bill Burk]

@M-88 when shooting black and white negative film at “less than rated speed”, you don’t have to think of it as pulling.

Compare that with color slide film. If you shot a 100 ISO slide film at EI 80 or EI 64 you have to tell the lab to pull or else the slides will turn out too light.

With black and white negatives you can make up for the greater exposure in camera by printing down in the darkroom.

So development time can be the same. There is a great long “straight line” section of the curve, and you are just sliding up the curve a bit.

 

[M-88]

when shooting black and white negative film at “less than rated speed”, you don’t have to think of it as pulling.

I didn't know that, but I'll keep it in mind, thank you.

With black and white negatives you can make up for the greater exposure in camera by printing down in the darkroom.

The issue I'm having with Tmax 100 is that negatives are pretty contrasty (more so, than anything else I have developed) and while they print nicely, they don't scan well. And of course even though I print 2-3 photos from the roll, I do scan an entire roll. That's why I thought of overexposing - maybe I'll be able to reduce contrast. That and also - agitate fewer times.

 

[Bill Burk]

The issue I'm having with Tmax 100 is that negatives are pretty contrasty (more so, than anything else I have developed) and while they print nicely, they don't scan well. And of course even though I print 2-3 photos from the roll, I do scan an entire roll. That's why I thought of overexposing - maybe I'll be able to reduce contrast. That and also - agitate fewer times.

What kind of enlarger do you have (diffusion/condenser) and what grade paper (or multigrade filter) are you having to use for a typical print?

That info can help you feedback to yourself whether you want to cut down developing time because the negatives are too contrasty.

If you print on grade 3 already, you are on the edge of needing more development time. If you print on grade 2 you could cut down development time. Somewhere in between is a good balance, so that sometimes you need grade 2 and sometimes you need grade 3. And that should be good for scans too.

 

[M-88]

What kind of enlarger do you have (diffusion/condenser) and what grade paper (or multigrade filter) are you having to use for a typical print?

That info can help you feedback to yourself whether you want to cut down developing time because the negatives are too contrasty.

If you print on grade 3 already, you are on the edge of needing more development time. If you print on grade 2 you could cut down development time. Somewhere in between is a good balance, so that sometimes you need grade 2 and sometimes you need grade 3. And that should be good for scans too.

It's a generic, condenser type Soviet enlarger, paper is Multigrade IV from Ilford and most of my Tmax 100 prints are done through Grade 2 filter (while other films like FP4+, HP5+ and Delta 100 come out nicely with Grade 3). So based on what you said, I need less developing time. But what about exposure? Should I over-expose too, or just shoot at box speed and under-develop?

I'm sorry if I sound ignorant. It's just, I can't find a proper use for Tmax 100 and I have 5 rolls of it. Wouldn't want to ruin them all.

 

[MattKing]

Are your shadows coming out with good detail and are the highlights detailed as well? If so, the exposure is fine, and you have room to cut back a bit on development to tame contrast.

 

[M-88]

Are your shadows coming out with good detail and are the highlights detailed as well? If so, the exposure is fine, and you have room to cut back a bit on development to tame contrast.

Shadows are alright, but highlights suffer - they are blown, more often than not.

 

[MattKing]

Shadows are alright, but highlights suffer - they are blown, more often than not.

Then leave the exposure as it is, and cut the development a bit.

 

[M-88]

Then leave the exposure as it is, and cut the development a bit.

Thanks a lot Sir, that's what I'll do next time I finish a roll.

 

[MattKing]

It would be worth your while to expose a couple of different scenes at both an EI of 100 and something lower, and then develop the roll with slightly reduces development. That way you can compare the results, to see what you prefer.

 

[M-88]

It would be worth your while to expose a couple of different scenes at both an EI of 100 and something lower, and then develop the roll with slightly reduces development. That way you can compare the results, to see what you prefer.

I figured that much and shot several different scenes at EI100 and EI 64. It's just, the roll is at frame No. 9 so there's still a long way to go. Also: photos turn out to be good if shot in overcast/cloudy weather, but in high contrast situation (sunny days), it all goes to waste.

 

[MattKing]

I figured that much and shot several different scenes at EI100 and EI 64. It's just, the roll is at frame No. 9 so there's still a long way to go. Also: photos turn out to be good if shot in overcast/cloudy weather, but in high contrast situation (sunny days), it all goes to waste.

You also might try changing how you meter the scene in contrasty conditions. Unlike many here I tend to either use incident metering or key my readings to mid-tones. That tends to result in better mid-tone and highlight rendition, which is what I prefer.

 

[Bill Burk]

Good advice all around. I think you can develop a little less to get a little less contrast. That doesn't mean you have to rate the film lower. I think you are overdeveloping now (for your enlarger) and you will get normal speed when you develop a little less. For the negatives you already have with blown highlights, you could look for a piece of frosted (opal) glass to put above the negative in your enlarger to "turn it into" a diffusion enlarger and maybe bring down some of the burn.

You are still free to choose EI 64 or 80 with TMAX100, you can mix exposures on a roll. Think of it like bracketing. All the (bracketed) shots on a roll will have the same contrast as each other.

 

[MattKing]

All the (bracketed) shots on a roll will have the same contrast as each other.

I wish this was better understood.

 

[Bill Burk]

I wish this was better understood.

Me too.

Bracketing is a good thing to do for occasional tough shots but if you do it all the time it’ll turn a 36 exposure roll of film into “twelve shots”.

In this case @M-88 , you should try a few different exposures to see what works best. I like lots of shadow detail and print on a diffuse enlarger, so think nothing of giving greater exposure and development. That’s not what you need. You have two pressures that drive a need for the least exposure and least development… The condenser enlarger and a scanner.

I’m sure you’re close.

 

[M-88]

For the negatives you already have with blown highlights, you could look for a piece of frosted (opal) glass to put above the negative in your enlarger to "turn it into" a diffusion enlarger and maybe bring down some of the burn.

The bulb I am using, while not frosted, has a matte finish. Would that do the trick too, or it has to be specifically a frosted one?

You also might try changing how you meter the scene in contrasty conditions. Unlike many here I tend to either use incident metering or key my readings to mid-tones. That tends to result in better mid-tone and highlight rendition, which is what I prefer.

To my shame, right now a roll of Tmax resides in Olympus 35RC, which is rather primitive. I should stop being lazy and take a hand-held meter with me.

 

[MattKing]

No shame in an Olympus 35RC - they are fine cameras. If you take care how you point them, you can also adjust how they meter.

 

[Vaughn]

100

 

[BCM]

Same for me. Never had a problem. I've shot 20 year old expired TMAX at 100 , very seldom had problem.

I agree for TMX shot in a normal situation. The effective film speed changes with N- or N+ by about 1/2 stop in my experience and testing and I often place shadow on Zone III-Zone IV since the film has a pretty good shoulder.