Now What! :)

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, my road trip through western states of USA is coming to an end and I shot exclusively TMax100 and Ektar 100, leaving my M240 at home. I will be developing TMax100 myself and will be following timings from massive development chart. I am a newbie at development and so far processed only one film (HP5 at 400) with reasonable success. I have DD-X and planning to use it for TMax100.

 

Since it is my first TMax100 processing (shot at 100), I am thinking it will be best to process a sample section of my roll first to test before I commit to rest.

 

Any advise from knowledgeable forum members will be appreciated.

[adan]

Depends on how good your first shots were on your first roll. Buying a roll to shoot specifically for testing may be cheaper than repeating part of the trip for something really nice that you mess up (or slice through the middle of) in testing.

 

DD-X is a good choice. I used it religiously when I still shot 35mm B&W on M's (Ilford Pan F mostly). Very inefficient for my 120 these days, or I'd still be using it. Gives full film speed (good shadow density) which is a help with TMax 100.

 

I was processing for scanning, so I underdeveloped about 10% from "book time" and got really nice "long endless whites" on Pan F. YMMV.

 

Keep in mind that the T/Delta-grain films are a bit more "high-strung" and picky when it comes to developing - not difficult, just not quite as forgiving of time/temperature variations as "old-tech" HP5 or Tri-X. But the steps after development just follow the normal procedure and are no more critical than for any other film.

 

However, you'll find out that the TMax films have a purple/pink sensitizing dye that is very reluctant to wash out. After fixing, they may still look very pink (but transparent) and it may not be until the end of the washing that it disappears completely. I use a hypo-clearing wash (PermaWash) and that seems to really help release the dye's grip on the emulsion - a minute in that, and most of the pink is now in the wash, not the film.

 

Pan F in DDX, M6, 21mm Elmarit

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 18, 2018 by adan

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Lukas F.]

Regarding the development times I'd rather check out Kodak's respective Ilford's datasheets for TMX and DD-X. I didn't take a look at the former, but the latter includes development times for TMX in DD-X 1:4. Of course the times mentioned there can too only be a starting point for further testing, but still.

 

I'd only use the MDC, if I can't find the infos I'm looking for in the datasheets. Regarding the more usual film/developer combinations and the MDC the best case scenario is that someone simply copied the development times from the datasheets.

[jmahto]

Regarding the development times I'd rather check out Kodak's respective Ilford's datasheets for TMX and DD-X. I didn't take a look at the former, but the latter includes development times for TMX in DD-X 1:4. Of course the times mentioned there can too only be a starting point for further testing, but still.

 

I'd only use the MDC, if I can't find the infos I'm looking for in the datasheets. Regarding the more usual film/developer combinations and the MDC the best case scenario is that someone simply copied the development times from the datasheets.

 

Massive development chart says 1+4 DD-X for 7 min at 68F. I will test it out first.

 

Depends on how good your first shots were on your first roll. Buying a roll to shoot specifically for testing may be cheaper than repeating part of the trip for something really nice that you mess up (or slice through the middle of) in testing.

 

DD-X is a good choice. I used it religiously when I still shot 35mm B&W on M's (Ilford Pan F mostly). Very inefficient for my 120 these days, or I'd still be using it. Gives full film speed (good shadow density) which is a help with TMax 100.

 

I was processing for scanning, so I underdeveloped about 10% from "book time" and got really nice "long endless whites" on Pan F. YMMV.

 

Keep in mind that the T/Delta-grain films are a bit more "high-strung" and picky when it comes to developing - not difficult, just not quite as forgiving of time/temperature variations as "old-tech" HP5 or Tri-X. But the steps after development just follow the normal procedure and are no more critical than for any other film.

 

However, you'll find out that the TMax films have a purple/pink sensitizing dye that is very reluctant to wash out. After fixing, they may still look very pink (but transparent) and it may not be until the end of the washing that it disappears completely. I use a hypo-clearing wash (PermaWash) and that seems to really help release the dye's grip on the emulsion - a minute in that, and most of the pink is now in the wash, not the film.

 

Pan F in DDX, M6, 21mm Elmarit

 

PanF-DDX.jpg

I will be happy if I get results even close to that.

 

When you said development temperature/time is critical, does it mean even a couple of degrees variation is not ok? In my first roll with HP5, I had 70degree instead of 68 (using glass thermometer) and it came out ok. Does TMax need exact 68?

 

According to the massive dev chart, 100 speed requires 7 min and 200 requires 9min (same temp and dilution). That is more than 25% time for one stop push. This means to me that if I am off by 5% then I should be ok. 5% translates to 3F variation at 68 and 30sec variation at 7 min. It all depends on whether development chemistry is linear wrt time and temperature.

 

Of course, I will test it out first.

Edited August 18, 2018 by jmahto

[M.Hilo]

I am not sure if you are going about this the right way. I think you need practical help from someone near you. If you are new to developing film, you are also new to judging the outcome.

 

Of course Adan here is right: just shoot another film at home and develop half of that film. When the film is dry you need to decide how good it is and I think this is where you should involve someone with experience. There are so many factors to consider. Best would be to then make (or have them made) a couple of small prints. Too hard, too soft? Lighter along the edges, so many things you can see right away . . . then, if you can improve, you develop the second half of the test roll and make adjustments (agitate more, or less, develop longer, or shorter, etc).

 

After that you will have a much better idea how to develop the important bunch of films. Still, starting out I would use a single film tank first. When it goes well you can do more films at the time . . .

[jmahto]

I am not sure if you are going about this the right way. I think you need practical help from someone near you. If you are new to developing film, you are also new to judging the outcome.

 

Of course Adan here is right: just shoot another film at home and develop half of that film. When the film is dry you need to decide how good it is and I think this is where you should involve someone with experience. There are so many factors to consider. Best would be to then make (or have them made) a couple of small prints. Too hard, too soft? Lighter along the edges, so many things you can see right away . . . then, if you can improve, you develop the second half of the test roll and make adjustments (agitate more, or less, develop longer, or shorter, etc).

 

After that you will have a much better idea how to develop the important bunch of films. Still, starting out I would use a single film tank first. When it goes well you can do more films at the time . . .

Thanks for the advice. Unfortunately I don't have anyone who can guide me locally that's why internet is my only friend. I am going to do test roll first as you and others suggested.

 

Based on Kodak data sheets and other sources, it seems that I can be off 10-20% and may still salvage it. I will be developing for scanning and I can do the further adjustments digitally. I will post results after I am done.

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

[...] you'll find out that the TMax films have a purple/pink sensitizing dye that is very reluctant to wash out.

 

Have you tried soaking the film in Dektol after fixing and washing?

[Pyrogallol]

Don’t worry about a film needing “exactly 68f” you won't see any difference with a degree or so either side. The pictures on the roll of film will probably have been taken at differing levels of light and contrast and the final contrast in the developed film produced by the time and temperature used will hopefully suit some negatives better than others.

Also if you compare a number of thermometers you will find that they vary a bit from one to another. Years ago colour negative film developing temperatures were supposed to be within a quarter of a degree of the manufacturers’ instructions, it would have been a very accurate processor who could achieve that without professional equipment.

[Lukas F.]

Massive development chart says 1+4 DD-X for 7 min at 68F. I will test it out first.

Ilford's datasheet says the same, i.e. that should work fine.

 

(At first this post said something different, because I mixed up T-MAX and Delta... my sincere apologies to those who saw this post before the edit.)

Edited August 18, 2018 by Lukas F.

[adan]

When you said development temperature/time is critical, does it mean even a couple of degrees variation is not ok? In my first roll with HP5, I had 70degree instead of 68 (using glass thermometer) and it came out ok. Does TMax need exact 68?

 

You don't have to use 68° specifically or only - you can adjust time to match the available temperature, just as with any other film. Any good film instructions will provide a table of temperatures and times, usually at 65°-68°-70°-72°-75°. You can use any of those temperatures (and interpolate times for the temperatures in between), but should adjust time (higher temp = less time).

 

You just don't have quite as much leeway to use the "wrong" time, for the best possible results, with the TMax films compared "older tech" films. At least that is what Kodak has said for 32 years. The TMax (or Ilford Delta) films have engineered tabular grains that are just pickier about development precision and timing, because they have more surface area/volume (to absorb developer, or the sensitizing dye mentioned earlier) than the traditional cubic or rhomboidal silver crystals used in Tri-X or HP5 or FP4 (and all films prior to ~1984).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabular-grain_film

https://goo.gl/images/ZRv9Mc

 

The advantage of TMax 100 is that it gives a film speed of 100 with the grain of an ISO 32-50 film (the old Panatomic-X, or Ilford Pan F). But - the price is, it requires more precise processing, and the quality drops more rapidly if the processing goes off the reservation. The older films are more grainy and less sharp for a given ISO - but by the same token, don't react to sloppy processing as much or as soon.

 

An analogy would be using a 90 APO vs. an old 90 Summicron with lots of spherical aberration - you notice missed focus more with the first than the second.

 

And no, the time/temperature scale is not necessarily "linear" - but even more important, don't judge "percentage of error" counting from 0° (which of course is different whether one uses F, C, or K degrees). You need to calculate from the tables this way, using for example TMax developer 1:4 with TMax 100 (Kodak's own figures):

 

65° - not recommended at all

68° - 7.5 minutes

70° - 7 minutes

72° - 6.5 minutes

75° - 6.25 minutes

 

Using the 68° time with 70° developer is an overdevelopment of 0.5 minutes, or 7%, not 2%.

 

End of lecture.

 

But don't panic - you won't lose your pictures if you miss by a bit. You just may get slightly less shadow detail, or more "blocked" highlights, or not see the finest grain, that TMax 100 can deliver when the processing is "nailed."

 

Another TMax oddity I failed to mention before is that a "good" Tmax negative will often look a bit less dense overall than, let us say, a "good" FP4 or Pan F or Tri-X negative.

[jmahto]

...

But don't panic - you won't lose your pictures if you miss by a bit. You just may get slightly less shadow detail, or more "blocked" highlights, or not see the finest grain, that TMax 100 can deliver when the processing is "nailed."

 

Another TMax oddity I failed to mention before is that a "good" Tmax negative will often look a bit less dense overall than, let us say, a "good" FP4 or Pan F or Tri-X negative.

Thanks a lot. I studied data sheets of Ilford too and now I have a decent understanding (albeit it is theoretical at this point). I also found some other graph with relation between film contrast vs development times in different developers. All tell me what you mentioned above that precision is required for optimal results and if I miss, I will get something less but still usable. I am going to shoot an extra roll, split it in two and process them with two slightly different times/temp combo to see the results.

 

I am basically an engineer by training and all this is quite exciting!  

[jmahto]

Don’t worry about a film needing “exactly 68f” you won't see any difference with a degree or so either side. The pictures on the roll of film will probably have been taken at differing levels of light and contrast and the final contrast in the developed film produced by the time and temperature used will hopefully suit some negatives better than others.

Also if you compare a number of thermometers you will find that they vary a bit from one to another. Years ago colour negative film developing temperatures were supposed to be within a quarter of a degree of the manufacturers’ instructions, it would have been a very accurate processor who could achieve that without professional equipment.

I remember chemistry lecture in high school about precision in measurements. I think only experience will tell me what variation is ok and what is not. I am going to resist the temptation to send my BW rolls to the mailer developer and do it myself.

[jmahto]

Finally I did it.

 

I tested first with a small snippet of roll (I had shot few test pictures in the beginning that I managed to cut by approximate guessing inside change bag). After that I developed  two rolls together (I have two reel Peterson tank).

 

I did get some spots though (actually a streak of spots running from one frame to another for 5-6 frames). They were on the sky and I fixed them in PS after the scan. I am guessing it was due to both the rolls together in the tank. This is the first time I did that and not sure what extra precaution need to be taken for two reels loaded vs only one reel loaded.

 

In any case, I did another development for TMax400 (that I mistakenly pulled to 100). This time single reel only and everything was perfect. I will developed only one roll at a time for the time being before I figure out what happened.

 

Oh, here are TMax 100 sample shots. I was more or less pleased. Thanks for all the good advice.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!