Hp5 vs TMY400

[chris_4622]

Quickest way to taste them would probably be to shoot a roll of each, widely bracketed & then process to a contrast index in the 0.52-0.58 range, contact print them well & see which general characteristics you prefer. The differences will be pretty obvious side by side, even on a 35mm contact sheet. TXP & HP5+ will be rather closer in character than TMY-II & HP5+.

Thanks for this simple yet overlooked (on my part) solution. I remember something about the UV dye in TMY II smaller formats so I'll avoid that by buying a 10 sheet box of 8x10 and cutting two pieces of 5x7 and test that way with a model. Then the same with Hp5. I use Pyrotcat HD and contact print on Lodima. I'll report back here. Thanks to everyone.

[Drew Wiley]

Pere - choice of dev and degree of dev can appreciably affect shadow repro in the print, along with choice of paper itself. The much greater flexibility of TMax is quite evident in, say, an outdoor wedding portrait where you've got a bride in white lace and groom in a dark silk suit. Sure, you can minus develop the film to avoid the "soot and chalk" look, but that just pancakes a lot of the lovely microtanality and detail that sets large format work apart. I'm speaking of ordinary silver printing. Some contact papers like an overexposed neg. I did often deliberately overexp HP5 for landscape shots, then rein it back in using unsharp masking. It has a different look from TMY prints. This is of course all about technical options. One's personal taste and style is the ultimate arbiter.

[Pere Casals]

Pere - choice of dev and degree of dev can appreciably affect shadow repro in the print, along with choice of paper itself. The much greater flexibility of TMax is quite evident in, say, an outdoor wedding portrait where you've got a bride in white lace and groom in a dark silk suit. Sure, you can minus develop the film to avoid the "soot and chalk" look, but that just pancakes a lot of the lovely microtanality and detail that sets large format work apart. I'm speaking of ordinary silver printing. Some contact papers like an overexposed neg. I did often deliberately overexp HP5 for landscape shots, then rein it back in using unsharp masking. It has a different look from TMY prints. This is of course all about technical options. One's personal taste and style is the ultimate arbiter.

Drew, I agree with you, but anyway I find TMY vs HP5 has a very slight difference in the shadows, perhaps 1/3 stop, also just using xtol one has 1/3 stop advantage in shadow detail over d-76... the nice thing of TMY is that it works very nice with TM developer...

Rather than shadows, for portrait I find highlights is what's really interesting.

I try to follow a bit what happens is cinematography... present digital movie camera manufacturers are all day long speaking about shadow detail and ISO 50 millions, but film cinematographers working for spielberg, tarantino or nolan just smile , they do the job with with the V3 50D, and that job cannot me matched by any digital bug with a magic LUT inside it, or in the post.

The key thing in a portrait isn't the shadows, you always can throw more light, use reflectors or place subject under the right light, or expose more, but managing volumes and beautiful glares on the skin is not that easy.

For some using illumination looks a sin... but Karsh used illumination extensively...

Anyway IMHO a portrait may also play with shadows, let me point this (hp5) one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/558734...125592977@N05/

[Drew Wiley]

I don't do a lot of portrait work, but the end result is that they were paying per print - something serious in a nice frame. Otherwise, they would have asked for someone else. They want high quality prints. But in this area, the sheer ethnic diversity favors a highly versatile film like TMax. But it's not a "wing-it" film that forgives casual exposure.

[Drew Wiley]

I should add that someone up the street is making a living on black and white darkroom portrait prints, and supporting a small studio in a pricey neighborhood. So there is a niche for it.

[Pere Casals]

...highly versatile film like TMax...

Well, I don't know if I'm mistaken, but I find HP5 is more versatile at the shot time, as the moderate HP5 shoulder prevents better excessive densities that may easy happen in a linear film. But in the darkroom the linear TMY capture, if good, it offers more verastility, as we can decide how we compress (the uncompressed) highlights...

I should add that someone up the street is making a living on black and white darkroom portrait prints, and supporting a small studio in a pricey neighborhood. So there is a niche for it.

This not very common, sadly, but I thing that it has great value, perhaps that niche may expand in the future, it would be nice...

[Drew Wiley]

Whatever. I'm comfortable with both, but recognize their respective pros and cons.

[interneg]

Thanks for this simple yet overlooked (on my part) solution. I remember something about the UV dye in TMY II smaller formats so I'll avoid that by buying a 10 sheet box of 8x10 and cutting two pieces of 5x7 and test that way with a model. Then the same with Hp5. I use Pyrotcat HD and contact print on Lodima. I'll report back here. Thanks to everyone.

It's the sheet TMX that has the UV absorber - rollfilm TMY-II is fine as far as I know.

[Ken Lee]

But at double-strength, one-shot 75F, TMax launches straight off the toe like a rocket.

Here's the BTZS test for TMY in TMRS 1:7 at 75 degrees. Is this the effect you're referring to, or are you referring to another dilution ?

(1:7 is the strongest dilution for that developer and film combination provided with the WinPlotter collection).

I see an increase in speed (a fraction of an f/stop) given by TMRS, but with my limited grasp the BTZS testing charts for HP5+ and TMY in several developers look more similar than different. Am I overlooking something ?

[Drew Wiley]

I don't know all the parameters there - dilution, time, temp. But it looks low contrast. TMRS is a high-contrast dev. See Kodak's own published curves. What does the 1+11 mean on the header? Hopefully not 1:11. That would sure explain the anemia. If someone wants to try high dilutions, go HC-110.