t-max 100 alternative

[John Brady]

I have been shooting with t-max 100 for years, I looked in my freezer today and realized I only have about 100 sheets of 8x10 left. I'm not really excited about paying $10 per sheet for a new supply. It looks like Ilford is about half the price and comes in 25 sheet boxes, I hate ten sheet boxes.

My process has been to develop with t-max rs 1:9 for 12 minutes at about 75f, which has given me good results with Jobo autolab.

So my question is, what film do you think best resembles t-max 100, and what would you do to process based on what I have been doing?

Sorry if they seam like noob questions but I'm guessing some of you have already gone down this road and I would love to learn from your experience. Thanks!

[Vaughn]

I used a lot of TMax100 in the past, but gave it up when they started using a UV blocking layer in it (not good for alt processes). After 40 years of photography, I still don't see a significant difference between modern films. FP4+ has been a great alternative to TMax for me -- very adaptable to different processes.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Delta 100.

[Michael R]

Delta 100.

+1

TMX 100 and Delta 100 have nearly identical characteristic curves in a variety of general purpose developers. TMX is a little finer grained (doesn't matter for LF). The two films have different reciprocity failure characteristics for long exposures but that's not a problem. Delta 100 should work fine with T-Max RS. Development times will need to be adjusted (likely to be shorter with Delta 100).

[John Brady]

+1

TMX 100 and Delta 100 have nearly identical characteristic curves in a variety of general purpose developers. TMX is a little finer grained (doesn't matter for LF). The two films have different reciprocity failure characteristics for long exposures but that's not a problem. Delta 100 should work fine with T-Max RS. Development times will need to be adjusted (likely to be shorter with Delta 100).

Thank you Michael, that is the kind of information I am looking for!

[Mark Sawyer]

TMX 100 and Delta 100 are both tabular-grain films, the only 100-speed films of that sort I know of, so there's at least that passing similarity. Edit, just thought of another one, Fuji's Neopan.

[Bruce Watson]

...what film do you think best resembles t-max 100, and what would you do to process based on what I have been doing?

The only other film still in production "like TMX" is Delta 100 AFAIK. It even has more or less the same reciprocity characteristics, which can be important to 10x8 shooters.

That said, FP-4+ is quite a nice film. But it's a cubic grained film and has cubic grained reciprocity characteristics from what I remember. But very nice tonality.

And with 10x8, graininess is almost a non sequitur so I wouldn't worry about that.

As to your process, changing film is a good time to change developer. I'm a big fan of XTOL, if for no other reason that its considerably lower impact on the environment. That, and the two Kodak researchers who invented XTOL (Zadwicki and Dickerson) told me that they created XTOL using TMAX films and Jobo rotary processing. Since that's more or less what you're using, you might as well use a developer that was optimized for your workflow. You did ask "what would you do to process", right? ;-) IOW, feel free to ignore me. Most people do.

[consummate_fritterer]

TMX 100 and Delta 100 are both tabular-grain films, the only 100-speed films of that sort I know of, so there's at least that passing similarity. Edit, just thought of another one, Fuji's Neopan.

Nope... Acros is NLA.

[sepiareverb]

I will also chime in with Delta 100, and would agree with Bruce that FP4+ is worth a look. I switched to FP4+ from Delta 100 as I found better shadow detail with it in my workflow in smaller formats, and when I returned to 810 just stayed with it.

[Pere Casals]

I'm fascinated by HP5, not a direct alternative because it's cubic and the 400 nominal speed, but the larger grain is not perceived in 8x10.

It's difficult to me to explain why, but I like more hp5 than fp4 or d100

[Drew Wiley]

TMX is steeper at the bottom of the curve than Delta 100. So if you expect analogous deep shadow separation, Delta needs more exposure in the shadows, so I rate it a full stop slower (ASA50), instead of the full box speed of TMX. Otherwise, both can be developed to a relatively high contrast gamma with similar grain structure, though Delta seems to have a tad more edge acutance. Specific spectral or filter response is quite different. As per FP4, it's quite versatile; but all these films are a somewhat slow for the combination of small f-stops and slower shutter speeds typical of 8x10 work. I find myself either choosing less windy days for outdoor shooting, or reaching for TMY400 - an absolutely wonderful 8x10 film, but alas, also expensive.

[Michael Kadillak]

General assertions similar to the comments above relating to density relationships relating to a particular film are a function of the developer and developing technique being deployed and (fortunately) can change dramatically as a function of changing the developer and developing techniques deployed. For example, ABC Pyro is notorious for loss of film speed necessary to maintain sufficient shadow detail. But the sacrifice in film speed is higher accutance within the mid tones. On the other side of the spectrum is Pyrocat HD in a Reduced Agitation Development regime that can substantively change the film curve of FP4+ at full box speed and seemingly unlimited high end density for N+3 development (which you simply cannot attain with conventional developers and processes) as well as managing N-3 scenes without fear. The density curve is shifted in a favorable photographic way to attain what seemed impossible and as a result, the economic necessity of not being held hostage of Kodak is a blessing in disguise. I hear photographers that are dialed into the way they have done things for X number of years that simply cannot consider new processes that can take them to a new level. Personally, I feel whatever I can deploy to attain optimal results in print tonalities I am open to try. I like to have a tool box of options to consider as a photographer and being able to wring exemplary performance out of a film like FP4+ is a no brained from my perspective. As I convey to my consulting clientiel, what is your objective and what are you willing to do to attain it? The choice is yours.

[Mark Sawyer]

Nope... Acros is NLA.

To quote Freddy Mercury, "another one bites the dust..."

[Bernice Loui]

Kodak T_max was marketed as a "fine grain" for roll film formats like 35mm. With sheet film at no more than 2 to 4x enlargement, grain size or configuration becomes a non-issue and overall print tonality and rendition is FAR better than prints made from roll film at 10x or more.

Ilford FP-4 would be the suggested replacement and IMO a better film than T-max 100. My preference is to use a high acutance developer that increases film grain edge effects with no consideration to grain size or shape. Works well for enlargements from 5x7 film to 10x14 or 14.5x20_ish.


Bernice



Bernice

[Drew Wiley]

TMax 100 has commendable attributes besides small grain. Greater linearity than FP4 for one thing. It is far more amenable to predictable deep contrast filtration, specifically with tri-color work. The very fine grain is nice for certain kinds of portraiture. I find the edge effect too soft for landscape work, where
both the speed and more pronounced edge effect of TMY400 are preferable. Try taking shots of brightly lit glistening snow or ice atop black volcanic rocks
with deep deep shadow texture - easily 12 stops of range; FP4 or ACROS or Delta just can't handle things like that without some kind of tonality trade-off in compression development. And now with both Super-XX and Bergger 200 gone, TMax is as good as it's gonna get for extreme contrast work. (I gave up on
Foma 200 due to quality-control issues.)

[Sergio Caetano]

IMHO would choose FP4. Although not tabular grain, has very nice tone scale and good sharpness, I use it with Willi Beutler .

[Jim Noel]

Great Answer Michael! My thoughts exactly.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Great Answer Michael! My thoughts exactly.

Mine as well.

[Pere Casals]

Mine as well, also. +1

[Drew Wiley]

Ridiculous. It's like asking a trumpet player if he'll be happy with a trombone instead. I can't stand either of those, while I do happen to like both FP4 and
TMax film, but for different reasons. Sometimes economics is one of the factors involved.

[StuartR]

The only other film still in production "like TMX" is Delta 100 AFAIK. It even has more or less the same reciprocity characteristics, which can be important to 10x8 shooters.

That said, FP-4+ is quite a nice film. But it's a cubic grained film and has cubic grained reciprocity characteristics from what I remember. But very nice tonality.

And with 10x8, graininess is almost a non sequitur so I wouldn't worry about that.

As to your process, changing film is a good time to change developer. I'm a big fan of XTOL, if for no other reason that its considerably lower impact on the environment. That, and the two Kodak researchers who invented XTOL (Zadwicki and Dickerson) told me that they created XTOL using TMAX films and Jobo rotary processing. Since that's more or less what you're using, you might as well use a developer that was optimized for your workflow. You did ask "what would you do to process", right? ;-) IOW, feel free to ignore me. Most people do.

Thanks for that information Bruce. That is really interesting...I run a lab where I standardize on XTOL in a Jobo, and my own work is nearly exclusively on Tmax....I get such good results from it (and Acros). It makes even more sense now that I know that they developed it based on the way I am using it... The only time I got results which I would characterize as "better" or at least substantially different, was with pyro, which is environmentally problematic and not nearly as safe...

[Steve Sherman]

Try taking shots of brightly lit glistening snow or ice atop black volcanic rocks with deep deep shadow texture - easily 12 stops of range; FP4 or ACROS or Delta just can't handle things like that without some kind of tonality trade-off in compression development.

Probably true for most processing techniques, however untrue for Minimal Agitation forms of PyroCat development.

Cheers. SS

[Willie]

Whichever film you start checking out seriously look at the reciprocity charts. If you are used to T-Max 100 you might find the alternatives to be a problem with exposures measuring in seconds or minutes.

[Vaughn]

...Try taking shots of brightly lit glistening snow or ice atop black volcanic rocks with deep deep shadow texture - easily 12 stops of range...
Man O Man -- I love 12 stop ranges! I can develop fairly normally when I get those! The below is a scan of a 5x7 carbon print. My Pentax Digital Spot read a 13 stop range, but it might have been more since who knows what is below 0. Anyway, the readings went from 0 to 13. A local sea cave at low tide, from the inside looking out, with direct sun coming into the cave. Without hunting down the negative, it might be on Tri-X, developed slightly less than normal ( a tad less).

PS...Just got 3 boxes of 8x10 FP4+ from B&H via Fed Ex today! $110 a box (no shipping, no tax).

[Jan Becket]

I migrated from T-Max 100 to Delta 100 about 8 months ago and discovered that I had to shift the ISO to 50 from 100. Also, in Pyrocat HD, the dilution of parts A & B had to shift from 1:20 to 1:40 (Iʻm using Sandy Kingʻs recommendation for a sequential processing in which film goes in part A then in part B - the two are never mixed.) None of this is a problem - just sharing.

However, I am running into some issues with Delta 100 - apart from the very nice tonality it yields. I take the film traveling and have to load / unload film holders in sometimes less than optimal conditions. Film tent. Sweaty fingers. No AC (Iʻm in Hawaiʻi.). Delta seems much more physically fragile than T-Max 100. In humid weather, sheets stick together in the box. They stick to my Toyo film holders if they are not quickly removed. Iʻve noticed some faint scratches on the sheets. My fault, but Iʻve been doing this for decades and have learned to play nice with my film. It has turned out to be delicate stuff.

[Michael Kadillak]

I migrated from T-Max 100 to Delta 100 about 8 months ago and discovered that I had to shift the ISO to 50 from 100. Also, in Pyrocat HD, the dilution of parts A & B had to shift from 1:20 to 1:40 (Iʻm using Sandy Kingʻs recommendation for a sequential processing in which film goes in part A then in part B - the two are never mixed.) None of this is a problem - just sharing.

However, I am running into some issues with Delta 100 - apart from the very nice tonality it yields. I take the film traveling and have to load / unload film holders in sometimes less than optimal conditions. Film tent. Sweaty fingers. No AC (Iʻm in Hawaiʻi.). Delta seems much more physically fragile than T-Max 100. In humid weather, sheets stick together in the box. They stick to my Toyo film holders if they are not quickly removed. Iʻve noticed some faint scratches on the sheets. My fault, but Iʻve been doing this for decades and have learned to play nice with my film. It has turned out to be delicate stuff.

Considering the circumstances the changing bag is not getting it done. Carry more holders and load film late at night when the temp drops.

I was recently on the Big Island with my 8x10 camera and only carried four loaded holders at a time. Makes you far more selective / productive. I loaded / reloaded the holders at our destination (the AC came in very handy) at night (but even without the AC it could have been done easily) in the bathroom after I taped a thick plastic bag over the window. Processing the 40 negatives I made there and absolutely no problems. I can't wrap my head around even attempting to load holders in the field given the conditions. Adapt as necessary to the conditions.

[chris_4622]

Considering the circumstances the changing bag is not getting it done. Carry more holders and load film late at night when the temp drops.

I was recently on the Big Island with my 8x10 camera and only carried four loaded holders at a time. Makes you far more selective / productive. I loaded / reloaded the holders at our destination (the AC came in very handy) at night (but even without the AC it could have been done easily) in the bathroom after I taped a thick plastic bag over the window. Processing the 40 negatives I made there and absolutely no problems. I can't wrap my head around even attempting to load holders in the field given the conditions. Adapt as necessary to the conditions.

Michael,
Can you share more information on processing while on the road? Did you bring Pyrocat Hd? How did you transport it, weigh, measure etc. What about tubes or trays? Fixer. Agitation schemes...
thanks
chris

[Michael Kadillak]

Michael,
Can you share more information on processing while on the road? Did you bring Pyrocat Hd? How did you transport it, weigh, measure etc. What about tubes or trays? Fixer. Agitation schemes...
thanks
chris

Absolutely.

Developing film on location I feel would start with mixed Pyrocat HD that you would need to bring with you. I have a plastic case that binoculars came in that would let me feel comfortable putting two bottles of pyrocat (one A and one B) in a plastic sealed bag in my luggage. I would toss in a bag of fixer powder to mix later and stop with water. The other "must have" from my perspective would be my infrared monocle and IR light source that I would wrap in bubble and carry on. Being able to develop by inspection is a must for me. Then the only other components would be trays and developing tubes (or both). I would wash the film individually and hang dry and take home in negative sleeves and archival wash when I got home as necessary. I might even consider buying a pair of knee pads used by tile workers so when I am kneeling over a bath tub or a shower base to develop the film I am not rendered immobile the next day. Heavy plastic bag over the bathroom window and towels to seal up the bottom of the bathroom door. Surely coming home with processsed sheet film would be enormously easier plus you know what you got before you leave. You should be able to blast through a days worth of negatives at the end of a days shooting in no time.

Cheers!

[Drew Wiley]

Ilford sheet films in general are more fragile than Kodak. I've known that for a long time. But it's a minor difference. When I use a changing tent, I have a kit
along which includes some pure alcohol wipes as well as little non-powdered finger cots - just like surgical glove material, but only big enough for the tips of
your fingers. I also have thin black polyethylene trashcan liners along to keep the inside of the tent especially clean. Usually when I've done this has been up
in the mtns backpacking where every inch of me was sweaty and dirty. No problem.

[Jan Becket]

Processing 8X10 on the road - Iʻm impressed. I schlep the film to and from and then of course worry about those airport X-ray machines being out of spec.

[Jan Becket]

Thanks for the suggestions, Drew. Finger cots - good idea. It still concerns me that Ilford sheets stick to themselves in high humidity, both before and after exposure. When loading the holders I have to fan the stack of film, to break it up and make sure that two do not get inserted instead of one. Same procedure in loading the JOBO reel. None of this has been a concern in 20 years of T-Max 100. My other option of course is just to migrate back and pay the extra $$$.

[Drew Wiley]

The original FP4 was actually interleafed with thin paper between the film sheets. FP4-plus is a little tougher, so they don't bother with that. Usually I
pre-load holders if I'm taking a view camera to the Islands. I did use a film tent on Kauai once; but that was TMax film and the evenings were relatively comfortable rather than humid. I've heard of people having roll film swell and jam in cameras in the Islands; but I've never personally had any kind of problem with roll film there. Perhaps they left film in the camera way too long before shooting it.

[Jan Becket]

The original FP4 was actually interleafed with thin paper between the film sheets. FP4-plus is a little tougher, so they don't bother with that. Usually I
pre-load holders if I'm taking a view camera to the Islands. I did use a film tent on Kauai once; but that was TMax film and the evenings were relatively comfortable rather than humid. I've heard of people having roll film swell and jam in cameras in the Islands; but I've never personally had any kind of problem with roll film there. Perhaps they left film in the camera way too long before shooting it.

I might give FP4+ a go if it is a bit tougher, as you say. I can still buy it here in Honolulu at Treehouse Photo. Perhaps the interaction with high humidity will be different - wonʻt know until I try. I shoot often in Kona, where the major problem these days is the vog. After 11 on many days (depending on wind) the haze from Kilauea blows in and plays havoc with the tonal range. Or not, depending on the effect you want. Forget those fluffy white clouds for sure :)

180018

[Drew Wiley]

Hmmm. We've been experiencing Godfather Movie light the last few days due to forest fire smoke above a layer of fog - really a lovely amber colored light. But I'm not going to photograph in it because I don't want all the fine white ashfall on my gear. Just rinsed a bunch of it off the cars and patio. The wind is due to shift over the next couple of days and then I'll go shoot again. The only time I photographed Kilauea crater it wasn't doing anything, but made an interesting shot anyway. There was a lava flow near the shore then, and some German tourist walked onto too thin a skin of lava and fell through - instantly
incinerated. We mainly visit Maui. Every time something seems to happen there too. Last trip it was someone peering into a blowhole and getting sucked in by a wave to disappear forever, and then the time before that some drunken businessman was out on a kayak with his buddies and wanted to get a close-up cellphone shot of a big shark by sitting on the front of the kayak with his legs dangling in the water - got pulled in and fatally bitten. Then the last time we were in Kauai someone tried crossing a stream during a flashflood and disappeared over the cliff; but it was nowhere as big a storm as this past winter there. Can't recall ever having film issues in the Islands, with either b&w or color film. But we're there only 8 or 10 days at
a time.

[Jan Becket]

Oh, thatʻs right. Forest fires - probably the functional equivalent of vog. I photograph in Kona and Kohala, but am leaving all the lava shots to others. Thatʻs become such a cliché. And yes, this can be a dangerous place below the pretty surface. I remember a surfer commenting after some fatal shark attack that when you enter the ocean, you enter the food chain.

Cycling back to this thread, does anyone know of a good source of information about Pyrocat HD reduced agitation development? Is that the same as stand development? I'm interested in doing some tests, although that sounds like I would have to give the JOBO (ATL 1500) a rest. If I am testing HP4+ anyway, might as well test a new development workflow at the same time.