TMAX 100, Using Stand Developing

[Michael Graves]

Greetings one and all,

A couple of weeks ago, after reading all the posts about using pyrocat developer and a stand developing technique, I tried it with some HP5 sheet film. After a couple of calibration sheets, I starting getting some very nice results. For that, I thank you all. Last night, I inadvertently developed some TMAX 100, and in a senior citizen's moment, since I was so accustomed to the stand development already, I ran it through as if it were my HP5. Here's what I did.

TMAX 100
Pyrocat 1:1:200
5 minute water soak
1 minute constant agitation
29 minutes standing in the developer
30 seconds constant agitation
30 minutes standing in the developer
3 water rinses
3 minutes in Photographers Formulary alkaline fixer

The negatives appear to be properly exposed, but the contrast is MUCH greater than I was getting with HP5. My questions are these. Are you not supposed to develop TMAX film by stand development? Or are you not supposed to develop TMAX film in Pyrocat? Or did I do something ridiculously wrong?

[sanking]

Greetings one and all,

A couple of weeks ago, after reading all the posts about using pyrocat developer and a stand developing technique, I tried it with some HP5 sheet film. After a couple of calibration sheets, I starting getting some very nice results. For that, I thank you all. Last night, I inadvertently developed some TMAX 100, and in a senior citizen's moment, since I was so accustomed to the stand development already, I ran it through as if it were my HP5. Here's what I did.

TMAX 100
Pyrocat 1:1:200
5 minute water soak
1 minute constant agitation
29 minutes standing in the developer
30 seconds constant agitation
30 minutes standing in the developer
3 water rinses
3 minutes in Photographers Formulary alkaline fixer

The negatives appear to be properly exposed, but the contrast is MUCH greater than I was getting with HP5. My questions are these. Are you not supposed to develop TMAX film by stand development? Or are you not supposed to develop TMAX film in Pyrocat? Or did I do something ridiculously wrong?

How did you come up with a time of 60 minutes of total develoment? Time is much too long IMO and is almost certainly the reason for the high contrast of your negatives. A total time of 20-25 minutes would have been much more appropriate for this develper dilution and film, assuming you are developing at about 70 degrees F.

Sandy

[Jay DeFehr]

Hi Michael.

The short answer is that you probably just left the film in the soup for too long. If you're counting on the developer exhausting before the film is overdeveloped, you'll need to use a more dilute developer solution.

I've been using a lot of TMX lately, and it looks fantastic developed in Hypercat (my own catechol developer) with rotary development. Tmax's ultrafine grain is masked by the stain for a super-smooth, liquid look, and the tanning and edge effects combine to produce excellent acuity.

I've also been experimenting with a simple, non-staining developer designed specifically for stand development, and my results with TMX have been excellent. So yes, you can develop TMX with Pyrocat, and with stand (semi-stand in your case) development, but I think overdevelopment is the least of the dangers you face combining the two. Watch for uneven development and other defects like streaking or mottling in the even-toned areas of your images, like even sky areas. Good luck.

Jay

[paulr]

i never tried stand development, but in general can say that tmx will behave differently from conventional emulsions. most disappointments with it come from treating it just like a traditional film and expecting similar results.

[Tom Hoskinson]

I've stand and semi-stand developed many rolls of TMAX 100 in Pyrocat-HD (16 to 18 minutes total developing time) with excellent results. I have not experienced any streaking or non-uniformity of development.

I have done continuous agitation comparison tests on 120 roll film and sheet film (exposed in the same camera with the same lens and shutter and the same subject and lighting ) and I don't see any differences in uniformity of development between them.

[Jay DeFehr]

Tom, I'm glad that you've been spared the problems associated with reduced agitation that have visited so many of us. I hope your luck holds out.

Jay

[Michael Graves]

Thanks, folks. I must have misread the times before. Oddly enough, the 30 + 30 was working great for the HP5. Sure sucks for the TMAX though. One of the teachers at the school where I teach gave me a box of film he had left over and I hated to waste it, and I was too stupid to run calibrations. Think I'll stick with the HP5.

[Tom Hoskinson]

Tom, I'm glad that you've been spared the problems associated with reduced agitation that have visited so many of us. I hope your luck holds out.

Jay

Jay, my luck with reduced agitation development has been holding out for a long time. I hope it continues, cause I like the results.

[Pete Caluori]

I've stand and semi-stand developed many rolls of TMAX 100 in Pyrocat-HD (16 to 18 minutes total developing time) with excellent results. I have not experienced any streaking or non-uniformity of development.

I have done continuous agitation comparison tests on 120 roll film and sheet film (exposed in the same camera with the same lens and shutter and the same subject and lighting ) and I don't see any differences in uniformity of development between them.

Hi Tom,

I've seen your posts here and on the AZO forum, but I'm curious how you are processing "roll" film using stand agitation? While I haven't tried it myself, all accounts I've read indicate streaking will result when using reels.

Regards, Pete

[Tom Hoskinson]

Hi Pete, I do a lot of photography and much of my testing with 120 and 35mm roll film. I process all my roll film on Hewes stainless steel reels in stainless steel tanks.

My results speak for themselves - a lot of other photographers obtain excellent results with minimum agitation techniques - and there are others who do not.

I believe that it is important to keep your reels and tanks (trays and tubes as well) very clean. My experience with students in a teaching darkroom environment have shown me that contaminated equipment (like reels with dried Photo Flo residue) can cause problems with developing uniformity and streaking.

I always use one-shot developers for film and I use a tank full of developer to help insure complete and uniform wetting of the emulsion. Developer is cheap. I also presoak the film in tempered deionized water unless the manufacturer of the film I am developing recommends against it. I use a tempered deionized water rinse instead of stop bath. I fix with Ryuji Suzuki's buffered (ammonium thiosulfate based) rapid fixer. I wash the film in filtered water using the soak and dump method followed by a rinse in deionized water.

I process my sheet film in Slosher Trays and BZTS type ABS tubes using the same procedures that I use to process Roll film.

I successfully use minimum agitation (Stand, Semi-Stand, etc) development techniques with all of these roll and sheet film developing systems.

[Jay DeFehr]

My results speak for themselves - a lot of other photographers obtain excellent results with minimum agitation techniques - and there are others who do not.

Hi Tom. Thanks for sharing your development procedures. I should clarify my position; I too have had success with reduced agitation, and even stand development, but I don't consider Pyrocat HD a good developer for stand development, and have seen all manner of development defects with this developer when agitation is inadequate. Sandy King has related similar experience, and has warned against stand development with his developer, due to the high rate of failure.


King:

Unfortunately this method of development is fraught with dangers and in practice it will be found that some films, especially high-speed films, are poor candidates for this type of development. And even when the procedure works well for a particular roll of film there will often be one or more frames that are ruined because of an air-bubble, bromide drag, or one of a number of other development artifacts that can plague this method of development. For this reason it is essential to test your film thoroughly, and to always make two or more back-up shots of important scenes when using stand development.

Jay

[j.e.simmons]

When I first tried minimal agitation development with Pyrocat HD in tubes, I had problems, too. I got streaks in the skies and increased development at the ends of the negatives when compared to the centers (open tubes in a bucket). A year or so later, I tried again and have had very good results so far. The difference in my technique was to agitate very vigorously when agitating. Before, I had just been sloshing gently - now, I roll closed tubes, or rapidly tilt the container when using open tubes.

That said, Jay, what's been your experience when using Hypercat in some minimal agitation scheme?
juan

[Jay DeFehr]

Hi Juan.

I've found that I get excellent sharpness with Hypercat and rotary development, so my reduced agitation experiments have been strictly in the interest of curiosity. I've not tried stand development with Hypercat, but have had good results with semi-stand, although the results are dramatic, and not appropriate for every subject. If I was making general recommendations for Hypercat, I would recommend that testing begin with rotary/continuous agitation, and reduced to taste. I would also recommend a dilution that permits development times in the 6-10 min. range for best grain/sharpness characteristics, and to minimize emulsion swelling. TMX developed in this way is astounding, and in my opinion, a viable replacement for Technical Pan, and according to a friend's reports, Delta 100 is similarly so.


All that being said, I think reduced gaitation schemes, in which the film is agitated every 3-5 minutes during 15-20 min. development represent the best compromise between the safety of continuous agitation, and the dangers of stand development, while delivering the effects we want from reduced agitation. With good darkroom practices and consistent technique, this approach should yield good results with almost any film/developer combination.

If you decide to give Hypercat a try, let me know and I can share my data to get you started on your own testing.

Jay

[Tom Hoskinson]

Jay I haven't yet tried Hypercat, but I have used your 510-Pyro (diluted ) with semi-stand agitation on TMAX-400 120 roll film with good results i.e. - uniform development with no streaks or other development defects.

I was not surprised by this result, since I also routinely develop TMAX-400 roll and sheet film semi-stand in Pyrocat-HD and Pyrocat P with good results - i.e. uniform development with no streaks or other development defects.

[Pete Caluori]

Tom, thanks for sharing your development routine!
Jay, thanks for you experience (I have seen your posts over on the AZO forum as well.)

Clearly this will be something I need to test myself and will do so as time permits.

Regards, Pete