Have You Tried Steve Sherman's EMA Process With Kodak TMAX 100 or TMAX 400

Having just purchased Steve Sherman's Extended Minimal Agitation PyroCat Premium video which I thought was excellent by the way, I was wondering if anyone has tried his process with other types of Film which Steve does not use such as TMAX and if so, how does it react to his process.

I appreciate the ultimate test is to try it for oneself but I was wondering if anyone had already done some testing and would be interested to hear their thoughts.

I've used EMA schemes for about a dozen years. For my lighting conditions they have worked well with every film I've tried, including TMX.

I use Steve's EMA process to develop 8x10 Fomapan 100 in homemade tanks very similar to the ones he shows in the video. Only differences I found in my testing between the Foma film and his preferred FP4+ is that I had to tweak the chemical ratio and agitation timings a bit. For example, I do 6x3(20) which is shorter than his times for the Ilford film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan9940

I use Steve's EMA process to develop 8x10 Fomapan 100 in homemade tanks very similar to the ones he shows in the video. Only differences I found in my testing between the Foma film and his preferred FP4+ is that I had to tweak the chemical ratio and agitation timings a bit. For example, I do 6x3(20) which is shorter than his times for the Ilford film.

---

Thanks Alan. I tried Fomapan 100 the other day doing an N+2 using his forumula

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j.e.simmons

I've used EMA schemes for about a dozen years. For my lighting conditions they have worked well with every film I've tried, including TMX.

---

Thank you. I will test my TMAX 100 over the next few days

This is photograph of the dried negative on the light box

I am very new to this process and PyroCat HD and still evaluating it as much as I can

Attachment 168770

Thanks Ian for starting this thread that could prove beneficial to many. As I said in my notes when the full impact of Adjacency Effects are controlled the EMA technique can diminish the actual specific characteristics of any given film due to most film's characteristic H&D curve can be manipulated to one's own preference, never before possible in an organic process that I am aware of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Sherman

Thanks Ian for starting this thread that could prove beneficial to many. As I said in my notes when the full impact of Adjacency Effects are controlled the EMA technique can diminish the actual specific characteristics of any given film due to most film's characteristic H&D curve can be manipulated to one's own preference, never before possible in an organic process that I am aware of.

---

Thanks Steve for the explanation.

From what I am experiencing, using the EMA process as outlined in the premium video and using the information provided as a good starting point, I am at last starting to see controlled highlights which I have never seen before. Yes, the negative on the table looks quite different but they scan beautiful with much pronounced separation than I used to get.

Interesting to me is that Steve, IIRC, began using this technique with negatives shot in the early morning with a low SBR. I use EMA for my negatives shot in the Florida swamps with very high SBRs. The same technique gives edge effects and controls SBR in both extremes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j.e.simmons

Interesting to me is that Steve, IIRC, began using this technique with negatives shot in the early morning with a low SBR. I use EMA for my negatives shot in the Florida swamps with very high SBRs. The same technique gives edge effects and controls SBR in both extremes.

---

I am guessing in that scenario, you will be apply some ( N- ) development and if so by how much. Also for the EMA, what is your personal choice of film