View Full Version : developing T-max 100 for kallitype

Gerard de Vrueh
23-Sep-2011, 08:54

I am going to take pictures soon with an 8x10 inch camera on T-max 100. I want to use the negatives for contactprinting kallitypes.

I have two developers that seem suitable:

- Finol from moersch (a pyro clone)
- Rodinal

I expose at 50 iso for the shadows.

Can any of you give me guidelines for these two developers for dilution, temperature and time?

And also what the advantage wood be, to one of these over the other. The Finol gives stain ant the negative would probably be usable for normal contact printing on an bariet paper and kallitypes. But my experience with this developer is not to good until now so i would hesitate using it.

So i need some info before i start wasting film and time.
Thanks in advance

Jay DeFehr
23-Sep-2011, 09:48
Hello Gerard,

If you've had problems with Finol, Rodinal is probably a better choice, and if there's any film suited to Rodinal, its TMX. TMX is said to incorporate a UV blocking coating that is supposed to make exposure times longer in UV processes, but some users report no such troubles. Whatever developer you use, you'll probably need to do some testing to get optimum results. There are lots of published times for TMX and Rodinal, and you could just add 50%-100% to those published times and get negatives suitable for Kallitype. Someone here can probably provide more specific suggestions. In any case, I would recommend testing with roll film. This will get you much closer to your goal before starting with very expensive 8x10 film.

Tanning/staining developers offer several advantages for your application, and if your interested I'd be happy to share a very simple formula you can make up at home with just a few ingredients.

Good luck!

23-Sep-2011, 10:14
Although I do not have any experience with the two developers you mention I have a fair amount of printing with the kallitype process. See my article at

I wrote this article at a time when I was still printing primarily with LF and ULF in-camera negatives so the ability to control contrast was important in my development. As I write in the article, “Although considerable contrast control is available in kallitype, it's advisable to start with a good negative and then apply corrective controls later. The best negative for kallitype has a density range of about log 1.8. This is a very contrasty negative that will not print well even on a grade #0 or #1 paper. If you are making in-camera negatives with sheet film, this density range can be achieved by developing the film about 50% longer than normal for silver gelatin #2 paper.”

If you use a staining developer you should be able to get a good dual-purpose negative, i.e. one that will print well in both silver and in kallitype, especially since you have a fair amount of contrast control with kallitype.

As Jay mentioned, there are conflicting reports on whether or not Tmax-100 has a UV blocking base. The Tmax-100 sheet film that I have does indeed have a UV blocker of about three full stops.


D. Bryant
23-Sep-2011, 11:04
As Jay mentioned, there are conflicting reports on whether or not Tmax-100 has a UV blocking base. The Tmax-100 sheet film that I have does indeed have a UV blocker of about three full stops.


This has been my experience as well (TMAX 100 effectively blocks UV light), hence I have moved on from using this film. If there isn't some other reason not to I would urge you to consider TMAX 400, aka, TMY-2 or the new Kodak TMY films. For contact printing of sheet film you are not likely to observe much difference in grain; depending on your development procedure you will probably see better highlight separation with TMY-2 and superior reciprocity characteristics.

Of course if this is after the fact there is not a documented method to successfully remove the UV coating from the film base of TMAX 100. Kodak has documented the use of a anti-UV coating for TMX at some point in this past so it is a component of the film of current products.

Don Bryant

Gerard de Vrueh
23-Sep-2011, 14:17

Tanks for your time to awnser my questions.

Since the film i have right now is way over due (1993!!!) i will just use these and not make tests with 120 film. Also i got this film for free from someone to experiment, with my home made cardbox 8x10 inch camera. So that these film are expencive is not really an issue in this case.

I will start with Rodinal and will develop 50 % longer than the time given by Kodak as a starting point. The fact is that the prints i have seen at this forum that were made with this film and rodinal showed very good sharpness and tones.

I will just have to experience weather or not this film is usable. In the past i always used FP4+ but i do not know if the film is stil the same since Harman has taken over.

@ sanking I have read your article at unblinking eye. It is very informative. Also until now i have used the "the ware " proces argyrotype. But since that is POP this limits the shadows as i have read. So now i want to try kallitype the DOP. I also liked the info about toning and clearing. Especially since i had a lot of trouble clearing argyrotype on Rives BFK.

I now want to try the most basic kallitype DOP on Ruscombe mill Buxton paper. And this just beggs for a 8x10 negative.

As soon as i gett a decent result i will post it

Thanks for the input

23-Sep-2011, 14:56
The change to an UV blocker was after the film was originally introduced -- so your film may not have it. Have fun!