Which developer with TMax100 4x5, with these circumstances?

[Colin Corneau]

Hello all
First post here, after soaking up info in a LOT of hours of reading the forums.

I recently returned from China, where I shot TMax 100 in 4x5 with a Crown Graphic (along with a Schneider 135mm) in remote areas bordering Tibet.

The film was rated at EI100 for exposures, shot in daytime.

Obviously, these images are pretty special to me as much for the subject matter as the difficulty in getting there, so I really want to get this right. My goal is to hand print the images on B&W paper (likely my favorite paper, Ilford Warmtone multigrade FB), with the eventual goal of an exhibit.

My question: which developer works well with this film, in your experience?

I've developed TMax100 in 35mm using the TMax developer, but notice the bottle says it's not recommended for film other than roll.
My previous developers with other films (including HP5 in 4x5) is either D76 or Ilfosol.

I'd prefer something trusty and familiar such as D76 but want to be 100% sure before touching a single sheet...thanks for any help!

[J D Clark]

Brandon,
For TMAX sheet film you should use TMAX RS developer rather than the regular TMAX developer which isn't recommended for sheet film. My understanding is that some people use this developer 1:9. The TMAX RS developer is specifically designed for sheet film.

I use HC-110, dilution B for 6 minutes.

What I would recommend, though, is to expose about half a dozen sheets under normal conditions in your back yard, and develop at least a few of them before your valuble negatives, no matter what developer you choose.

John Clark
www.johndclark.com

[Andrew O'Neill]

The best conventional developer that I have found for Tmax 100 is D76 at a 1+1 dilution, and Xtol 1+1.
I hope the EI of 100 will be okay for you as that may result in slightly thin shadow densities...I usually shot this film at an EI of 64 with either developer mentioned above.
When you have your film developed, I'd love to see the results. Be sure to post them here, eh?
PS. Brandon Wheat Kings suck...

[Robert A. Zeichner]

I've developed TMX 100 in D-76 full strength and 1:1, in HC-110 (actually Ilfosol HC) 1:38 (Dilution B), in T-Max RS as directed in the instructions and in Xtol. I've had good results with all of them, although the Ilfosol is a little on the gentle side for N+ developments for my taste. I have settled on D-76 straight as my standard developer for this film in a Jobo expert drum.

One question I would ask is did you base exposure using zone system technique or something else? What was the range of luminance? Normally, I expose TMX as though its EI was ASA 64 or more recently ASA 80. Having done so, I give it about 20% less development time to prevent overly dense highlights. If you have some negatives that are duplicates or similar to others, you might want to see if some underdevelopment will give you a more printable result.

I would proceed slowly. If your film was exposed at higher altitudes, you may have denser results than you planned on due to higher amounts of UV. Maybe you could give us a little more detail about the subject matter, the lighting and your exposure technique. That info could help determine what makes the best sense for development.

[Skorzen]

I was happy with the little bit of Tmax 100 (came in some film holders) that I shot at 100 and souped in rodinal @ 50+1 for 11 min, but I am kinda new to this. What I would suggest if these images are important to you (sounds like they are) is shoot some more and try different developers and see what gives you what you want before trying it on your irreplaceable negatives.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Talk about working backwards...I'd know your materials inside and out before going on the trip of a life time...

[Ron Marshall]

I've tried XTOL, D76, Pyrocat HD and Rodinal with TMX. All did a good job, but I found the best combination of speed, grain and acutance with XTOL 1:2. I get an EI of 80 with XTOL.

What I suggest is shoot a couple of sheets using the same lightmeter and EI that you used in China and then develop them as tests and make any necessary adjustments of your development times based on those results.

Good luck! Don't forget to post the results.

By the way, in what province were you shooting?

[evan clarke]

FX37 1+5 will work well at EI 100..Evan Clarke

[j.e.simmons]

I've had good success with TMX using PC-TEA 1:100 at the times for XTOL multiplied by 1.6. I'm rating the film at 50, though.
juan

[Ken Lee]

Since you intend to develop sheet film, and since the trip was already a non-trivial expense, it might be helpful to spend just a little more, and invest a few hundred dollars in an Infra Red Viewing Device (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/tech.html#Monocular), so that you can perform Development By Inspection. That way, no matter what developer you choose, you can monitor and control the development of every single shot.

Just this morning, I was developing some 4x5 sheets, and discovered, while in the developer, that I over-exposed one of the portraits I made, while working in a hurry at a family gathering. I cut development time a bit on those sheets, the result being an N-1 development time, and a lovely negative with full shadows and perfect high values. It will be easier to print, than an over-exposed negative.

Likewise, I found that the shadows were a little empty in another shot, so I left it in the bottom of the tray for a while without agitation: a bit of semi-stand development, so that the shadows would build up.

I did this while developing 20 other sheets, all at the same time, which some might consider a high number. When you can see what you're doing, everything goes a lot more easily.

Once, I discovered during development, that there was something wrong with the developer. Nothing was coming out. (Perhaps I made a mistake in mixing the solution. Who knows ?) So I just mixed up some more - in the dark - and proceeded. The viewing device paid for itself on that day.

[evan clarke]

Since you intend to develop sheet film, and since the trip was already a non-trivial expense, it might be helpful to spend just a little more, and invest a few hundred dollars in an Infra Red Viewing Device (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/tech.html#Monocular), so that you can perform Development By Inspection. That way, no matter what developer you choose, you can monitor and control the development of every single shot.

Just this morning, I was developing some 4x5 sheets, and discovered, while in the developer, that I over-exposed one of the portraits I made, while working in a hurry at a family gathering. I cut development time a bit on those sheets, the result being an N-1 development time, and a lovely negative with full shadows and perfect high values. It will be easier to print, than an over-exposed negative.

Likewise, I found that the shadows were a little empty in another shot, so I left it in the bottom of the tray for a while without agitation: a bit of semi-stand development, so that the shadows would build up.

I did this while developing 20 other sheets, all at the same time, which some might consider a high number. When you can see what you're doing, everything goes a lot more easily.

Once, I discovered during development, that there was something wrong with the developer. Nothing was coming out. (Perhaps I made a mistake in mixing the solution. Who knows ?) So I just mixed up some more - in the dark - and proceeded. The viewing device paid for itself on that day.

Thanks for this lead, Ken. I have seen some complicated suggestions without very good endorsements. I just ordered one from Optics Plus...Evan Clarke

[Andrew O'Neill]

Likewise, I found that the shadows were a little empty in another shot, so I left it in the bottom of the tray for a while without agitation: a bit of semi-stand development, so that the shadows would build up.

That only is successful if enough exposure is given to the shadows.

[Brian Ellis]

I used D76 1-1 with TMax 100 for many years. Since you exposed at EI 100 you may have some slightly underexposed shadows in some negatives. I think an EI between 50 and 80 is more common for TMax 100 (I rated it at 50). I don't mean to worry you unnecessarily, that minor a difference is not going to be a big deal. If these negatives weren't so important I might suggest trying divided D76 or a similar form of stand development that would allow you to build up density in the shadow areas without blowing out the highlights. But given the significance of the negatives, and the fact that you apparently haven't done any testing to determine your EI and development times with this film, it's probably best to stick with something plain vanilla like D76 1-1.
Certainly a little experimentation with some exposures made at home to check on your developer and times would be in order before starting in on these negatives. Sounds like a great trip, I spent some time in Tibet a few years ago and loved it.

[Michael Mutmansky]

FX-37 or FX-39 (if you can get it). It is a speed enhancing developer, so it will handle your 100 ISO setting better than most.

Don't waste your time on DBI unless you are very familiar with it. You will be all over the map otherwise, and that's the last thing you want to do with important film.

Go out and shoot some more sheets in a close reproduction of the shooting conditions you were in, and then do some film testing with your chosen developer to determine the proper time in the soup. Then, develop away. If anything comes out less than ideal, don't blame anyone but yourself for not doing this testing before you shot the film, however.


---Michael

[Colin Corneau]

Thanks, all. I'm pretty amazed by the excellent replies, so quickly! But, having read the forums for awhile when I was overseas, I'm not surprised.

A few points:
• Yes, it is a little backwards, the way I did it. I was scrambling in preparing for the trip, though, and truth be told I'm quite new to large format photography. I've shot a bit before with the Crown, but nothing consistent or very much.
Hence, my not even knowing about shooting TMax100 at EI80 or lower. So, mea culpa on that one.

• I was shooting in Gansu Province, in northwest China. The altitude is quite high, but not as high as the Tibet SAR..this prairie shooter never had altitude problems while there.
I shot in daylight, usually light clouds but normally some blue sky showing. They were very straightforward portraits of people I encountered, usually full length. Sometimes I used a red filter if I thought it would help darken the skies.
I used my DSLR (Nikon D2Hs) to meter the scene.

• Brandon Wheat Kings do not suck. 8^)

I'd definitely do some tests, I have about a dozen sheets left from the box of 50 that I took over there. And, I'll look into the infrared viewing device -- that's a new one by me, but proof once again of the worth of a forum like this.

It might be a bit of time, but I'd love to post some results here, for sure. Many thanks!

[Don Hutton]

The only way I get full box speed with TMX is with semi stand development in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 - 13 minutes for normal SBR... I do it in a Jobo 2500 series drum with a 2509n reel - 5 minute presoak, 20sec agitation at start and 10s at halfway.

Tmax100 has quite an abrupt toe in most developers - slight under exposure will result in no shadow detail. I think Michaels suggestions are pretty much spot on.

[Kevin Crisp]

Colin: I personally never cared for the film in HC110, though when I read the John Sexton article and tried D76 1:1 I became a fan. Xtol 1:1 has also been fine. I never had trouble getting the rated speed with my meter. I suggest that whatever you decide to use, you expose a few sheets using the same method you did on your trip and try the developer and time combination on those test shots rather than "experimenting" with images that took a lot of time and $$ to make.

[Ken Lee]

Don't waste your time on DBI unless you are very familiar with it. You will be all over the map otherwise, and that's the last thing you want to do with important film.

Excellent point, and thanks for the clarification: You wouldn't want to learn DBI on these negatives.

Even though one can see clearly in the dark with an IR device, it takes a little experience to judge when a negative is right. For one reason, the negative has not been cleared by the fixer. Until then, it has a somewhat milky appearance.

That's why I always use a timer. When there is any doubt, I stick to the prescribed time and temperature. But it gives me a warm feeling that DBI is available for occasional corrections, and to prevent scratches and other surprises.

One of the great advantages of sheet film, is that it allows us to develop each negative individually. Being able to see it, in addition to relying on our best planning, makes that a reality.

[Ed Richards]

1) I get full speed from Tmax 100 with Xtol 1:3 in a Jobo Expert Drum.

2) This is not the time to learn sheet film processing. Send the film to a good pro lab, I am sure the list folks can give you some leads. They can do some test sheets just to make sure things are working, then process the rest. Given what you have spent already, it will be cheap and fool proof.

[Colin Corneau]

I should also mention: I've previously developed HP5 sheet film using a Yankee tank (the plastic one that can take up to a dozen sheets at one go).

That would be the method I'd use for this work, once I've got the developing process worked out. Being as I'm almost as far from civilization here at home as I was when making the pictures, I always assumed I'd rely on myself to produce the images every step of the way...however, if I could be SURE of a quality lab handling the negs well, I'd be interested in knowing how to get the film to them also -- please feel free to email me the info if anyone prefers.

But, this is info I need to learn and do myself - so the advice here is very welcome.

[D. Bryant]

.

But, this is info I need to learn and do myself - so the advice here is very welcome.
Okay here is my advice.

1) Don't waste your money on the IR device. Learn DBI with another film besides TMAX 100. HP5 would be a good choice for that.

2) Don't use Yankee tanks for anything. Just throw it away and get it out of your life. Learn to develop with a rotarty processor such as a Unicolor drum, BTZS tubes, or a Jobo.

3) For this lot of film, find a top notch B&W pro lab and pay them to do it and then learn your craft on new work.

My 2 cents,

Don Bryant

[Clyde Rogers]

I process TMAX 100 sheet film in TMAX RS and xtol 1:1 in Jobo drums, and get the rated speed with my spot meter. Both developers look good to me, but I've ended up preferring the xtol because I like it better for roll film.

I agree about the Yankee tank, I tried one years ago and and did not get nearly as even development as the Jobo provides. Given your parameters, I'd recommend running tests using xtol 1:1 with BTZS tubes (run six tubes at once, read some of the good info about using the tubes on this website or apug.org). They're easy to use, and relatively cheap. When you've used six tubes several times with good results, then charge ahead start processing your trip negatives. If all goes well, you'll be done testing in one day.

Backup options are to do the same tests with one of the Jobo 4x5 drums on some sort of roller base (or to really spend a lot, get a Jobo...). The Jobo is easier than the tubes, but they both are pretty simple.

The final option is to ignore all of us about the Yankee tank, run your tests and decide for yourself if the results satisfy you.

Until later,

--clyde

[Bill_1856]

Now is NOT the time to learn how to develop sheet film (especially T-Max, which is notoriously fickle to develop). If these negatives are as important to you as the would seem to be, I would recommend that you find yourself a good professional lab and have them done by someone who knows what they are doing.
Expensive? yes! Worth it? Also definitely!
Whoever you pick, be sure to send them a couple of trial negatives before trusting them with your trip stuff.

[Colin Corneau]

Which would lead to me asking --

Anyone recommend a top notch lab in Canada?

Some good lessons here, albeit learned retroactively!

[Colin Corneau]

Also, if it's not veering off the topic too much - what is the problem most people here have with the Yankee tanks?

I've only developed some HP5 in them, so I don't have enough variety or experience to be able to say. However, it worked out well for me so I was wondering what reasons you all had for the thumbs down on this product.

[evan clarke]

I might take a little flack but I always make 2 sheets of the same exposure and have never lost a valuable image since I started doing it. 95% of the time the first one goes fine so I have a surplus of second sheets on hand waiting to be developed. If you want to experiment you have a nice source of sheets and a good neg to compare to. With Tmax, this costs about $1 extra per photograph, cheap!..Evan Clarke

[Joseph O'Neil]

A few thoughts..

1) with any speed or size of T-max, when in doubt, use good old D-76. It may not be "sexy" but it gets the job done, and is as about as bullet proof as you can get with T-max.

2) go out, buy a box of T-max 100, take your same camera and same light meter and same lens you used in China, shoot the entire box over a few days or weeks, develop all the sheet films (even if it takes you a week or three) before you even touch your China trip film. What you will learn from your mistakes with this box will guide you through your China shots to safety.

3) Buy some zip lock bags, and right now, store all your exposed film inside those zip lock bags. I am assuming your exposed film is in either an empty film box or even some film holders - probally an empty box is best. Whatever way you do it, I find variations in moisture can hard film much more than variations in temperature. Zip lock bags are cheap and effective way to protect film.

4) A good pro lab in Canada that does B&W (any format?) Ahem - yeah right. The main reason I started developing my own B&W film 25 years ago is because even then the so called "pro labs" would butcher my B&W film all to heck. Even the same labs that did a wonderful and excellent job on colour films - when it came ot B&W - yeck! So unless the situation has improved in 25 years, learn to do your own. You might find an exception, and I apologize ahead of time if you do, but I'd rather bet on finding a real leprechaun in Ireland than a real B&W pro lab in Canada. :)


5) as for developing 4x5 sheet film, of all the methods I have tried, a Jobo tank is the most consistent. Even on a manual base where you hand roll it works better, IMO, then tray development or SS hangers.

good luck
joe

[Hans Berkhout]

If you are stuck I'd be happy to develop your film. I'd have to develop some test shots first, naturally. Contact me if interested, I'm in Calgary. Only cost for you would be shipping and chemicals, plus a box of film.

[Brian K]

Hello all
First post here, after soaking up info in a LOT of hours of reading the forums.

I recently returned from China, where I shot TMax 100 in 4x5 with a Crown Graphic (along with a Schneider 135mm) in remote areas bordering Tibet.

The film was rated at EI100 for exposures, shot in daytime.

Obviously, these images are pretty special to me as much for the subject matter as the difficulty in getting there, so I really want to get this right. My goal is to hand print the images on B&W paper (likely my favorite paper, Ilford Warmtone multigrade FB), with the eventual goal of an exhibit.

My question: which developer works well with this film, in your experience?

I've developed TMax100 in 35mm using the TMax developer, but notice the bottle says it's not recommended for film other than roll.
My previous developers with other films (including HP5 in 4x5) is either D76 or Ilfosol.

I'd prefer something trusty and familiar such as D76 but want to be 100% sure before touching a single sheet...thanks for any help!


Colin, do you have any sheets left of the same emulsion of film you shot in China? If you do do some test exposures with it. Using the same meter and metering techiques you used in China, as well as the same lens, expose some sheets metering with EI (film speed) 80, 100, 125. You now have film that is expendable so you can test developers without ruining any important film. If you have never done processing by inspection and using night vision trying it out with irreplaceable film might not be the best time.

A good, simple, reliable developer is D-76, however I would suggest not going with 1:1 but going straight, because 1:1 can make Tmax 100 a little grainier than need be. However if you are going to use a Jobo or other rotary processor then you will need to go 1:1 to give a long enough dev time for eveness. Only use fresh d-76 as D-76 more than 2 weeks old changes and causes higher contrast. D-76 will deliver a nice tonality, good film speed, probably around 80, and high acutance.

Xtol is a good developer, but it can make for a mushy grain that many find unattractive and has the appearance of lower acutance because of the mushy grain.

[Brian K]

I see that Joseph and I are on the same wavelength. Next time I read the ENTIRE thread before posting...

[Colin Corneau]

Many thanks, Brian - I do have about 10 sheets of the same film, from the same box, left over. Most of it in the holders I loaded over there.
I'll put the film holders and box with exposed sheets in ziplock bags (great tip!) and soon as I get a bit of time free from work, will set to work exposing those test sheets.

As a side note, the Crown Graphic was a great little camera to travel with. Often, I didn't have a lot of time for various reasons, and the speed of setup was appreciated.
My photography with it was straightforward - portraits of people - so no tilt or shift was needed, making shooting with it even quicker.
It was compact, relatively light and very tough - took some knocks while way out in the countryside. And, as a complete LF beginner, it was a great choice to use (especially with the nice Schneider lens mounted on it).

[D. Bryant]

Also, if it's not veering off the topic too much - what is the problem most people here have with the Yankee tanks?

I've only developed some HP5 in them, so I don't have enough variety or experience to be able to say. However, it worked out well for me so I was wondering what reasons you all had for the thumbs down on this product.
Colin,

There are a lot of problems that can be encounterd with film development in the Yankee tanks.

1) The film is sometimes or often not enitely developed to the edges.
2) Adjacent sheets will touch during development.
3) Film can be scratched during loading and more often removal from the film holder.
4) Streaking can occasionally occur during development.
5) Rotary processing produces even consistent development, although there are potential problems with rotary development but on the whole rotary development is the superior approach.

Don Bryant

[D. Bryant]

Many thanks, Brian - I do have about 10 sheets of the same film, from the same box, left over. Most of it in the holders I loaded over there.
I'll put the film holders and box with exposed sheets in ziplock bags (great tip!) and soon as I get a bit of time free from work, will set to work exposing those test sheets.

As a side note, the Crown Graphic was a great little camera to travel with. Often, I didn't have a lot of time for various reasons, and the speed of setup was appreciated.
My photography with it was straightforward - portraits of people - so no tilt or shift was needed, making shooting with it even quicker.
It was compact, relatively light and very tough - took some knocks while way out in the countryside. And, as a complete LF beginner, it was a great choice to use (especially with the nice Schneider lens mounted on it).
Colin,

You may wish to read this thread on APUG.ORG about the Yankee film development tank. It can make a decent wash tank for 4x5 film. :)

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum43/28982-yankee-sheet-film-tank-use.html

Don Bryant

[Colin Corneau]

Yes, it seems I'm now going to have to educate myself about which system to get to process the negs I'm itching to go out and make!

In addition to the crash courses in field camera use, film and paper and developer selection, lens selection and use....

[Ed Shapiro]

My best and most consistent results with T-Max 100 in HC-110 Dilution B. When using this combination, it is important to remember that overdevelopment is not advisable. Overdevelopment oftentimes results from over agitation, too vigorous agitation and of course too much time in the developer.

HC 110 developer does tend to produce and upswept curve with more contrast in the highlights than in the shadows- this is especially true with T-Max 100.

It is hard for me to suggest developing times because so much depends on one’s individual processing methodologies and machinery. I still use a 3 1/2 gallon tank line where temperature control and agitations times are monitored to a fault. My development time is 6 minute with 10 seconds of GENTLE agitation every minute- all chemicals at 68 degrees F. The key to success is to make a series of tests under your shooting conditions and with your darkroom equipment to customize a development time that suits your working methods and which produces compatible with your enlarger or digital system for final printing.

Yesterday, I posted something about my development method on another thread- I will re-post it here:

Call me old fashioned but I’m still a large tank guy. Yup, give me those old hard rubber or stainless steel 3 ½ gallon jobs with floating lids and a bunch of hangers and I am in heaven. I was never much for daylight loading tanks because of so many inconstancies which can occur due to poor agitation techniques, chemical “jetting” through narrow channels and even reticulation problems that stem from temperature fluctuation when changing liquids. The symptoms of some of theses pitfalls may not be outrageous but the can, in subtle ways, cause quality loss- quite the antithesis of larger format usage.

I realize that daylight loading devices are handy when no darkroom space is available; however, if anyone is going to print the negatives in a traditional analog darkroom they are going to have to eventually end up in a light tight dark place with an enlarger.

My set up is a wooden water jacket that I constructed a very long time ago- it’s made of plywood and coated with marine epoxy. This large troth-like thing holds 8 stainless tanks which accommodate all my chemistry and easily maintain constant temperatures in all the tanks.

This might sound like a heck of a lot of space and work but it is well worth it because I am reward with faultless negatives that are easy to print, free of any kind of dust or physical damage, have totally even contrast and density right across the board, and have wonderfully tight grain. The system works quite well with the zone system when film needs to be pre-soaked, pulled or pushed.

My philosophy in this method is based on certain factors: Excessive contrast and overdevelopment occurs when films are overly agitated- much more severely and quickly than many workers realize. With the hangers in a good rack, I can control the rate of style of agitation very precisely and make sure immersion is very consistent. When transferring the batch from the developer to the stop bath I allow for ample drainage and use a weaker stop bath to avoid “shock” when transferring from an alkaline solution to an acidic one. After fixing I go to a clearing agent and am especially accurate with the immersion time so as to avoid emulsion swelling. The wash water is filtered and temperature controlled.

I am always aware of “wet time”. Too much wet time kills quality- that’s why I use the clearing agent- but with care.

This system may not be practical for everyone. I run a full time studio and offer my black and white portraits on fiber base double weight papers as a premium product. I though my method might be interesting to some new large format enthusiasts or somewhat nostalgic to some old guys like me.

Ed

[Stephen Sample]

I get great results with Tmax RS at 1 to 9 using the BTZS system and tube development.

[Colin Corneau]

Thanks!

The only problem I have with the BTZS tanks is the time they are open to light, going from developer to stop...it's only brief and some may say it does no harm but I just don't like that.

[Thomas Greutmann]

I have shot quite a few TMAX 100. I use D76 full strength, rotary development in Jobo 2500 series tubes with good results. Development times according to Kodak data sheet.

For high-contrast subjects (as it might be the case for your subjects at high altitude) I overexpose by one stop but use reduced development (about 70% of the standard development time). Results are better. You might want to try this for some negs. From other threads in the forum I read that this is especially true when you want to scan the negs and print digital - which is what I do.

Greetings, Thomas