Tips for using Tmax 400 and B + W in general.

[Bill Clark]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have M4 Leicas, w/o light meter. I use a Sekonic L-158 light meter which I don't believe is made anymore.

 

For 400 speed films I expose at 200 and develop based on that exposure. I have several reasons but one I will mention here is I keep unexposed film for a long time and with 400 ASA films if I expose at 400 ASA I get some base fog on old film that doesn't show up when exposed at 200 ASA. Less development time. I'm cheap! Use everything til its used up!

 

May I recommend two areas to work on:

 

Try developing your own film. It's easy and I enjoy it. I'm always experimenting with different solutions, trying to get better results.

 

Please look for good controlled light. The sample photo you show here has overhead light, hence the light on the cheeks, tops of the heads and no light in the eyes.

 

Happy you're interested in black & white film. Hope you're not mad at me for my suggestions.

 

Have a wonderful week!

[xalo]

Just if I could clarify your point, regarding the metered area, does that mean, at 90 mm, the finder is measuring 23% of the 90mm white finder window? at opposed to the whole viewable finder? Dave.

 

Dave, to make sure, yes, the meter is measuring 23% of what is inside the white 90mm (or any other mounted and coupled lens') framelines, because the circle of measurement is situated just behind the lens. It is not 23% of the entire finder. You probably saw the graphic representation in the manual. In use you will gradually visualize this; it's fun to play with the meter to check out the different intensities and overall range of light in a scene and get a feel for the meter's "circle of sensitivity" at various focal length - you do not always need to expose a film for that.

 

Alexander

[roguewave]

Best move is to switch to TriX 400.

[RotarySMP]

As others have pointed out, the one off investment in a developing tank, and minor cost of developer and fixer will be covered after only a couple of films @$37 a film.

 

Do you have a digital camera? Depending on the camera resolution, you can get pretty decent results scanning your film with a camera.

 

To really get the maximum benefit of film, an all analog workflow (enlarger and darkroom) is hard to beat. Film really is magical if not digitised.

[david878]

As others have pointed out, the one off investment in a developing tank, and minor cost of developer and fixer will be covered after only a couple of films @$37 a film.

 

Do you have a digital camera? Depending on the camera resolution, you can get pretty decent results scanning your film with a camera.

 

To really get the maximum benefit of film, an all analog workflow (enlarger and darkroom) is hard to beat. Film really is magical if not digitised.

 

I'm sure it is. cant wait to get the developer.

 

BTW how long does it take to enlarge a photo from a neg> 5 minutes?

 

I di have a digital Camera, a Canon 7D, but dont have any macro lens. Do you think its worth buying a macro lens, or just buying a film scanner?

 

Cheers

Dave.

[david878]

Dave, to make sure, yes, the meter is measuring 23% of what is inside the white 90mm (or any other mounted and coupled lens') framelines, because the circle of measurement is situated just behind the lens. It is not 23% of the entire finder. You probably saw the graphic representation in the manual. In use you will gradually visualize this; it's fun to play with the meter to check out the different intensities and overall range of light in a scene and get a feel for the meter's "circle of sensitivity" at various focal length - you do not always need to expose a film for that.

 

Alexander

 

Thats for Pointing to the Manual, haha have not looked at that for a while .

 

Attempting to operate a new toy without reading the instructions , can be manly but also a waste of time ;

[Messsucherkamera]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

M6TTL manual, p24 onwards.

 

Best move is to switch to TriX 400.

Ixwas going to suggest giving Tri-X a test drive as well as getting set up to develop your own film. I'm glad to see that others agree.

 

You might try exposing a couple of rolls of Tri-X at ISO 320 (do this by setting your light meter at 320 rather than 400) and then developing it as ISO 400; what this will do is essentially give the emulsion +1/3 stop exposure, helping to open up the shadow areas. If you expose at ISO 250 and then develop at ISO 400, you have given the emulsion +2/3 stop exposure.

 

Tri-X has a long exposure curve and is pretty forgiving exposure wise, which is one of its many strengths. As for developer, D-76 and Tri-X were made for each other. If you give this combination a try you will see why Tri-X is revered by many B&W photographers.

 

Home developing is the only way to go IMHO. In my area labs will charge $5.00USD or more per roll (prints cost extra) to devevop B&W. It costs me 1/10th that amount or less to develop my own. The $75 to $150 USD investment in film developing hardware quickly pays for itself and you get a feeling of accomplishment from developing your own film.

 

In addition, you will mystify and amaze all your friends who shoot only digital and make them all sick wth envy of your incomprehensible photographic super powers.

[RotarySMP]

For a crop format camera like the 7D, you don't need much macro capablity to cover the negative. Try what you have first. If you have a 50, you could also try a macro spacer rube.

 

I only have a 30D, and use an old Bellows (for minolta) with a minolta MF 50 macro, and EF to MD adaptor (chinese). Even with the bellows collapsed I have too much enlargement. The 8mp is not really enough to do a film negative justice. I need to try this set up with my friends 5D MKII, as it should be just about perfect for full frame. The tonal range of black and white seems to be no problems for a sensor. Expose to the right.

 

I thought about getting a nikon scanner, but they are now all at least five year old (often older), digitial ice does not work on B&W, and scanning is slow (I used a minolta dual scan for years).

 

Because scanning with a D-SLR is so fast, you can develop the film in the bathroom, hang it up to dry (the shower keeps this the least dusty room), then scan while it is still clean, and before archiving. Once you are set up, it only takes a few minutes to scan the whole film.

[Scarlet]

Best move is to switch to TriX 400.

 

Yep I, too, much much much prefer Tri-X over Tmax.

[ai1]

This may be repetitive, but try developing your own film. The quality you get from processing labs can vary greatly. Find some stainless steel tanks and reels (I prefer the long discontinued Nikor reels). Practice on some film in daylight unitl it becomes second nature. Consider getting a changing tent if you do not have a lightproof room. And, be careful with your metering technique.

 

I historically used Tri-X (typically with an EI of 200 and development time reduced about 30% from recommneded times in D-76, (1:1), HC-110 or Microdol-X (1:3) -- Microdol has been discontinued, but Ilford makes an equivalent. About four years ago I started using TMax, version 2 (TMY-2) developed in Tmax developer. It is liquid and it is conveneient. Generally , I expose at EI 320, with a 5% - 10% reduction in recommended times. (It is important to have an accurate thermometer and to control temperatures.) This film also pushes well to 1600. Download the data sheets from Kodak. The times in the data sheets are starting points. The actual development times will vary with each photogtapher, and will depend on a number of variables, inlcuding metering technique, desired contrast, printing methods, etc. .I do not see a huge difference in tonal range between my inkjet prints from TMax and gelatin silver prints from Tri-X, but that is in large measure because I have adjusted my working methods to get there.

 

TMax scans very well, but scanning my old Tri-X negatives is not any more problematic (except for some of the negatives developed in Microdol -X).

 

The most important thing is to stick to one film and one developer until you master that combination, then, if you feel the need, experiment with different combinations. Finally, think about what you want your prints to look like. For example, are you lookng for a tonal range like Henry Wessel uses or a darker tonality, say, as Josef Koudelka uses (Leica photographers all)?

 

Most of all, relax and make it fun.

[Chuck Albertson]

TMax 400 is a terrific film, but it is really picky about correct exposure and development and can give poor results if either are a bit off. That can make for a steeper learning curve than with a more tolerant film like Tri-X. But if you put in the effort to learn TMax 400, you'll get a lot out of it.

 

Second all the other suggestions to try developing it yourself--that's the best way to learn about the film. I develop all my b&w film at home, print at a rental darkroom.

 

And like Bill Clark said, try a better-lit scene before beating yourself up (or the camera). For something like a dimly-lit bar or restaurant, try TMax 3200 instead of pushing Tmax 400.

[StS]

Meybe it's me, I never got good results with TMax3200. I even liked the results more, when pushing TMax400 to 1600 ASA rather than pulling TMax3200 to 1600 ASA, although the former is pushing a rather critical film out of it's comfort zone.

 

I should try the Ilford Delta 3200 occasionally.

 

To throw another film in - when having the films developed and scanned, BW400 can be a good starting point. It can be developed in C41 (in fact, it is a colour film without the colours and gives the look of a colour film converted to black and white in terms of "grain"), has a yellow-filter built in and a very large exposure latitude.

 

In fact, I have all three films discussed here in my fridge, Tmax400, Tri-X and BW400.

 

Stefan