T-Max 3200

On 2007-07-05 09:19:11 +1000, "Richard Knoppow" said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in message
news:2007070508523316807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-03 16:15:17 +1000, carbon based life form said:

Anyone have any experience with HC 110 to reduce grain size in P3200?
Or any other developers (other than T-Max & D-76...which are not really
fine enough for my tastes..).

TIA
sam

I would like to thank you all who have taken the time to reply.....from
what I am gleaning I think that my "problem" with 3200 is that I am
shooting at 3200. so be it. I shoot in the streets at night and
somewhat hesitant about giving away the extra stop. After revisiting
some of my negs I realise that in the blacks of the prints (clear on
the neg) I am getting a "scolloping" effect which may not actually be
grain per se. It seems to come and go between batches of film......more
investigation required. anyway thanks again all. cheers!
sam

I don't know what the scalloped effect is. I've seen something like
it on very old film that was probably subject to excessive moisture
during storage. This is probably something else.
Kodak does not recommend HC-110 for pushing and its probably not an
optimum developer for TMX 3200. Push developers include Kodak T-Max and
T-Max RS, Xtol, and Ilford Microphen. Of these Xtol will give the best
combination of speed and fine grain. T-Max 3200 is probaby pretty fine
grain for its speed but faster films will always be grainier than
slower ones and pushing will always increase grain.
Films like T-Max 3200 and Ilford's equivalent test at about EI-800
to 1000 when tested using the ISO method for B&W still films. The
capability of less exposure than given by this is a property of the
curve shape and low fog of these films. There really isn't such a thing
as "true" speed, only the speed given by a particular test method. The
ISO standard makes assumptions about the way film will be used and
printed that may not be valid for film like these.
"Pushing" any film is really developing for increased contrast. The
low exposure part of the film curve, called the toe, always has a
lower contrast than the "straight line" portion of the curve normally
used. Pushing increases this part of the curve making low exposures
have greater tone separation. However, it also increases overall
contrast so pictures taken where there is a relatively large variation
in lighting can become very contrasty in highlight areas that are
exposed above the toe. There is no cure for this, its something that
must be dealt with in printing.

Thanks for the ideas Richard...having re-examined my film I notice that
what I am objecting to is in fact the film base....the "noise", if you
will, is evident in between the sproket holes; not that I print the
sproket holes, but rather in the clear areas of my negs (the blacks in
the print) the actual film itself is giving me a "grainy" look. This is
the same stuff that I see along the edges of the film where there
should be no silver left. Ah well.

"carbon based life form" wrote in
message news:2007070510283216807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-05 09:19:11 +1000, "Richard Knoppow"
said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in
message news:2007070508523316807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-03 16:15:17 +1000, carbon based life form
said:

Anyone have any experience with HC 110 to reduce grain
size in P3200? Or any other developers (other than
T-Max & D-76...which are not really fine enough for my
tastes..).

TIA
sam

I would like to thank you all who have taken the time to
reply.....from what I am gleaning I think that my
"problem" with 3200 is that I am shooting at 3200. so be
it. I shoot in the streets at night and somewhat
hesitant about giving away the extra stop. After
revisiting some of my negs I realise that in the blacks
of the prints (clear on the neg) I am getting a
"scolloping" effect which may not actually be grain per
se. It seems to come and go between batches of
film......more investigation required. anyway thanks
again all. cheers!
sam

I don't know what the scalloped effect is. I've seen
something like it on very old film that was probably
subject to excessive moisture during storage. This is
probably something else.
Kodak does not recommend HC-110 for pushing and its
probably not an optimum developer for TMX 3200. Push
developers include Kodak T-Max and T-Max RS, Xtol, and
Ilford Microphen. Of these Xtol will give the best
combination of speed and fine grain. T-Max 3200 is
probaby pretty fine grain for its speed but faster films
will always be grainier than slower ones and pushing will
always increase grain.
Films like T-Max 3200 and Ilford's equivalent test at
about EI-800 to 1000 when tested using the ISO method for
B&W still films. The capability of less exposure than
given by this is a property of the curve shape and low
fog of these films. There really isn't such a thing as
"true" speed, only the speed given by a particular test
method. The ISO standard makes assumptions about the way
film will be used and printed that may not be valid for
film like these.
"Pushing" any film is really developing for increased
contrast. The low exposure part of the film curve, called
the toe, always has a lower contrast than the "straight
line" portion of the curve normally used. Pushing
increases this part of the curve making low exposures
have greater tone separation. However, it also increases
overall contrast so pictures taken where there is a
relatively large variation in lighting can become very
contrasty in highlight areas that are exposed above the
toe. There is no cure for this, its something that must
be dealt with in printing.

Thanks for the ideas Richard...having re-examined my film
I notice that what I am objecting to is in fact the film
base....the "noise", if you will, is evident in between
the sproket holes; not that I print the sproket holes, but
rather in the clear areas of my negs (the blacks in the
print) the actual film itself is giving me a "grainy"
look. This is the same stuff that I see along the edges of
the film where there should be no silver left. Ah well.

The sprocket hole effect is a well known one for 35mm
film. Its there because there is increased turbulance around
the holes which in turn causes increased development there.
The effect used to plague the motion picture industry
because it caused a 96hz hum in the sound tracks due to the
proximity of the sprocket holes. One can still sometimes
hear this in old movies.
I don't know a good cure for it, it seems to happen with
both twirling and inversion agitation but can be minimized
by using inversion tanks which are well filled with
developer and don't allow the film reel to move around much.
Changing developer probably won't help much but longer
development times may help even it out. Probably push
processing exagerates the effect.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

On 2007-07-05 16:52:15 +1000, "Richard Knoppow" said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in message
news:2007070510283216807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-05 09:19:11 +1000, "Richard Knoppow" said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in message
news:2007070508523316807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-03 16:15:17 +1000, carbon based life form said:

Anyone have any experience with HC 110 to reduce grain size in P3200?
Or any other developers (other than T-Max & D-76...which are not really
fine enough for my tastes..).

TIA
sam

I would like to thank you all who have taken the time to reply.....from
what I am gleaning I think that my "problem" with 3200 is that I am
shooting at 3200. so be it. I shoot in the streets at night and
somewhat hesitant about giving away the extra stop. After revisiting
some of my negs I realise that in the blacks of the prints (clear on
the neg) I am getting a "scolloping" effect which may not actually be
grain per se. It seems to come and go between batches of film......more
investigation required. anyway thanks again all. cheers!
sam

I don't know what the scalloped effect is. I've seen something like it
on very old film that was probably subject to excessive moisture during
storage. This is probably something else.
Kodak does not recommend HC-110 for pushing and its probably not an
optimum developer for TMX 3200. Push developers include Kodak T-Max and
T-Max RS, Xtol, and Ilford Microphen. Of these Xtol will give the best
combination of speed and fine grain. T-Max 3200 is probaby pretty fine
grain for its speed but faster films will always be grainier than
slower ones and pushing will always increase grain.
Films like T-Max 3200 and Ilford's equivalent test at about EI-800 to
1000 when tested using the ISO method for B&W still films. The
capability of less exposure than given by this is a property of the
curve shape and low fog of these films. There really isn't such a thing
as "true" speed, only the speed given by a particular test method. The
ISO standard makes assumptions about the way film will be used and
printed that may not be valid for film like these.
"Pushing" any film is really developing for increased contrast. The low
exposure part of the film curve, called the toe, always has a lower
contrast than the "straight line" portion of the curve normally used.
Pushing increases this part of the curve making low exposures have
greater tone separation. However, it also increases overall contrast so
pictures taken where there is a relatively large variation in lighting
can become very contrasty in highlight areas that are exposed above the
toe. There is no cure for this, its something that must be dealt with
in printing.

Thanks for the ideas Richard...having re-examined my film I notice that
what I am objecting to is in fact the film base....the "noise", if you
will, is evident in between the sproket holes; not that I print the
sproket holes, but rather in the clear areas of my negs (the blacks in
the print) the actual film itself is giving me a "grainy" look. This is
the same stuff that I see along the edges of the film where there
should be no silver left. Ah well.

The sprocket hole effect is a well known one for 35mm film. Its
there because there is increased turbulance around the holes which in
turn causes increased development there. The effect used to plague the
motion picture industry because it caused a 96hz hum in the sound
tracks due to the proximity of the sprocket holes. One can still
sometimes hear this in old movies.
I don't know a good cure for it, it seems to happen with both
twirling and inversion agitation but can be minimized by using
inversion tanks which are well filled with developer and don't allow
the film reel to move around much. Changing developer probably won't
help much but longer development times may help even it out. Probably
push processing exagerates the effect.

thanks for your insights mate I do appreciate it...I may try a
developer/dilution/temp combination based on a longer time.....oh and
yes it's more noticable on rolls developed singularly in a dual reel
tank, rather than when processing two at a time....cheers!
sam

On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 22:52:33 GMT, carbon
based life form wrote:

I think that my "problem" with 3200 is that I am
shooting at 3200. so be it. I shoot in the streets at night and
somewhat hesitant about giving away the extra stop.


July 5, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

Well, don't feel too bad. You can't really
give away what was never there. Nothing but
advertising hype.

regards,
--le

"carbon based life form" wrote in
message news:2007070517442516807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-05 16:52:15 +1000, "Richard Knoppow"
said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in
message news:2007070510283216807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-05 09:19:11 +1000, "Richard Knoppow"
said:


"carbon based life form" wrote in
message news:2007070508523316807-someguy@someplace...
On 2007-07-03 16:15:17 +1000, carbon based life form
said:

Anyone have any experience with HC 110 to reduce
grain size in P3200? Or any other developers (other
than T-Max & D-76...which are not really fine enough
for my tastes..).

TIA
sam

I would like to thank you all who have taken the time
to reply.....from what I am gleaning I think that my
"problem" with 3200 is that I am shooting at 3200. so
be it. I shoot in the streets at night and somewhat
hesitant about giving away the extra stop. After
revisiting some of my negs I realise that in the
blacks of the prints (clear on the neg) I am getting a
"scolloping" effect which may not actually be grain
per se. It seems to come and go between batches of
film......more investigation required. anyway thanks
again all. cheers!
sam

I don't know what the scalloped effect is. I've seen
something like it on very old film that was probably
subject to excessive moisture during storage. This is
probably something else.
Kodak does not recommend HC-110 for pushing and its
probably not an optimum developer for TMX 3200. Push
developers include Kodak T-Max and T-Max RS, Xtol, and
Ilford Microphen. Of these Xtol will give the best
combination of speed and fine grain. T-Max 3200 is
probaby pretty fine grain for its speed but faster
films will always be grainier than slower ones and
pushing will always increase grain.
Films like T-Max 3200 and Ilford's equivalent test at
about EI-800 to 1000 when tested using the ISO method
for B&W still films. The capability of less exposure
than given by this is a property of the curve shape and
low fog of these films. There really isn't such a thing
as "true" speed, only the speed given by a particular
test method. The ISO standard makes assumptions about
the way film will be used and printed that may not be
valid for film like these.
"Pushing" any film is really developing for increased
contrast. The low exposure part of the film curve,
called the toe, always has a lower contrast than the
"straight line" portion of the curve normally used.
Pushing increases this part of the curve making low
exposures have greater tone separation. However, it
also increases overall contrast so pictures taken where
there is a relatively large variation in lighting can
become very contrasty in highlight areas that are
exposed above the toe. There is no cure for this, its
something that must be dealt with in printing.

Thanks for the ideas Richard...having re-examined my
film I notice that what I am objecting to is in fact the
film base....the "noise", if you will, is evident in
between the sproket holes; not that I print the sproket
holes, but rather in the clear areas of my negs (the
blacks in the print) the actual film itself is giving me
a "grainy" look. This is the same stuff that I see along
the edges of the film where there should be no silver
left. Ah well.

The sprocket hole effect is a well known one for 35mm
film. Its there because there is increased turbulance
around the holes which in turn causes increased
development there. The effect used to plague the motion
picture industry because it caused a 96hz hum in the
sound tracks due to the proximity of the sprocket holes.
One can still sometimes hear this in old movies.
I don't know a good cure for it, it seems to happen
with both twirling and inversion agitation but can be
minimized by using inversion tanks which are well filled
with developer and don't allow the film reel to move
around much. Changing developer probably won't help much
but longer development times may help even it out.
Probably push processing exagerates the effect.

thanks for your insights mate I do appreciate it...I may
try a developer/dilution/temp combination based on a
longer time.....oh and yes it's more noticable on rolls
developed singularly in a dual reel tank, rather than when
processing two at a time....cheers!
sam

Do you put an empty reel in the double tank? If not the
turbulance caused by the single reel sliding around can
cause all sorts of problems. I suspect you are putting the
empty reel in.
I will add that obtaining uniform development has been a
bug-a-boo in photography nearly from the beginning. All
sorts of methods have been tried for scientific photography,
emulsion research, speed testing, etc. Some are better than
others but I don't know of a perfect method.

--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

On Jul 3, 2:15 am, carbon based life form wrote:
Anyone have any experience with HC 110 to reduce grain size in P3200?
Or any other developers (other than T-Max & D-76...which are not really
fine enough for my tastes..).

TIA
sam


Try Paterson FX-39. T-Max 3200 is a grainy film. To get the best
results, expose it at EI 800 and develop to print properly on grade 3
paper..