Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote:

No, VFD is not necessary. Films with S-shaped curves provide ideal
negatives with proper exposure and normal development. That's my
point.

Michael, with all respect, I did 35mm photography professionally (PJ) for
many years and we used Tri-X because it was the most flexible. Sure, we also
use 2475 recording film for pushing the impossible. But for intentional
photography: that is when one can reasonably anticipate the opportunity,
Tri-X isn't the way to go. I think most of the people here aren't
photojournalists so they can pick and choose their film to suit the subject.
The famous "S" curve as you describe it is definitely not what is
perscribed for many, many photographic opportunities. Sometimes TM films are
just right.

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote:

No, VFD is not necessary. Films with S-shaped curves provide ideal
negatives with proper exposure and normal development. That's my
point.

Michael, with all respect, I did 35mm photography professionally (PJ) for
many years and we used Tri-X because it was the most flexible. Sure, we also
use 2475 recording film for pushing the impossible. But for intentional
photography: that is when one can reasonably anticipate the opportunity,
Tri-X isn't the way to go. I think most of the people here aren't
photojournalists so they can pick and choose their film to suit the subject.
The famous "S" curve as you describe it is definitely not what is
perscribed for many, many photographic opportunities. Sometimes TM films are
just right.

jjs wrote:
: "Michael Scarpitti" wrote:

: No, VFD is not necessary. Films with S-shaped curves provide ideal
: negatives with proper exposure and normal development. That's my
: point.

: Michael, with all respect, I did 35mm photography professionally (PJ) for
: many years and we used Tri-X because it was the most flexible. Sure, we also
: use 2475 recording film for pushing the impossible. But for intentional
: photography: that is when one can reasonably anticipate the opportunity,
: Tri-X isn't the way to go. I think most of the people here aren't
: photojournalists so they can pick and choose their film to suit the subject.
: The famous "S" curve as you describe it is definitely not what is
: perscribed for many, many photographic opportunities. Sometimes TM films are
: just right.

I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften. :-)

I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last summer. She
use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were spectactularSP?!!

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

jjs wrote:
: "Michael Scarpitti" wrote:

: No, VFD is not necessary. Films with S-shaped curves provide ideal
: negatives with proper exposure and normal development. That's my
: point.

: Michael, with all respect, I did 35mm photography professionally (PJ) for
: many years and we used Tri-X because it was the most flexible. Sure, we also
: use 2475 recording film for pushing the impossible. But for intentional
: photography: that is when one can reasonably anticipate the opportunity,
: Tri-X isn't the way to go. I think most of the people here aren't
: photojournalists so they can pick and choose their film to suit the subject.
: The famous "S" curve as you describe it is definitely not what is
: perscribed for many, many photographic opportunities. Sometimes TM films are
: just right.

I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften. :-)

I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last summer. She
use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were spectactularSP?!!

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: Frank Pittel wrote in message ...
: Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: : Frank Pittel wrote in message ...
: : Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: : : Frank Pittel wrote in message ...
: : : Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: : : : Frank Pittel wrote in message ...
: : : : Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: : : : : (Stefan Kahlert) wrote in message . com...
: : : : : 'Mastering' a film won't change its basic charachteristics.
: : : : :
: : : : : TMY as well as TMX has significantly different curve shapes with
: : : : : different developers. Take a look at Kodak's publications.
:
: : : : : Different, but not 'significantly' different. Not enough different to
: : : : : become similar to Tri-X.
: : : :
: : : : Why would I want a fine film like TMY to end up looking like Tri-X?? That would be an
: : : : unacceptable step backwards.
:
: : : : Depends on what you mean. Tri-X have a superior characteristic curve
: : : : for uncontrolled/outdoor work.
: : :
: : : Sounds like you need to learn how to control the Tmax films. They have a wide exposure
: : : latitude. Even your aproach of guess at the exposure and pray for the best method
: : : can give you a printable negative if you develop it right.
: :
: :
: :
: : : The question is not getting a 'printable negative' but an ideal one.
: :
: : Getting an ideal negative is why it's important to use the zone system with Tmax films.
:
:
:
: : No, VFD is not necessary. Films with S-shaped curves provide ideal
: : negatives with proper exposure and normal development. That's my
: : point.
:
: Your guess at the exposure and develop at whatever the film manufacturer suggests as
: a starting point may give you printable negatives but only rarely will you get "ideal"
: negatives from it. The only thing that's saving you is that you're bouncing the
: highlights into the shoulder of the film. Then again having seen examples of the dreck
: you call photographs I know that your standards are low enough that you'd be happy with
: a negative most of us would throw away.



: 1. I don't 'guess' at the exposure.

You just know what the proper exposure is without needing a meter. At least that's what
you used to claim. I'd be interested to know if you changed the truth.

: 2. I have had stuff published that I threw away.

I saw a lot of images that you put on a web site that should have been thrown out.

: 3. Go **** yourself.

Now where's the love??
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

"Frank Pittel" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften.
:-)

A little. I appreciate the straight-line 'curve' for flat light situations.
I haven't been able to cope with high-contrast scenes. In fact, I become so
despondent that I held a film burning for the whole lot of exposed
negatives. That's a Bad Thing.

I'm onto Efke films right now. I'll revisit TM next year.

I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last
summer. She
use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were
spectactularSP?!!

I'm a Rodinal _freak_ so I want to believe.

"Frank Pittel" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften.
:-)

A little. I appreciate the straight-line 'curve' for flat light situations.
I haven't been able to cope with high-contrast scenes. In fact, I become so
despondent that I held a film burning for the whole lot of exposed
negatives. That's a Bad Thing.

I'm onto Efke films right now. I'll revisit TM next year.

I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last
summer. She
use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were
spectactularSP?!!

I'm a Rodinal _freak_ so I want to believe.

jjs wrote:
: "Frank Pittel" wrote in message
: ...
: jjs wrote:

: I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften.
: :-)

: A little. I appreciate the straight-line 'curve' for flat light situations.
: I haven't been able to cope with high-contrast scenes. In fact, I become so
: despondent that I held a film burning for the whole lot of exposed
: negatives. That's a Bad Thing.

The TM films are intended to be used with the zone system. You can control the contrast
with reduced development. I haven't figured out what to do with the 10 stop scenes we
get a lot of here in the midwest. I have found a developer from photographers formulary
(I think that's the name) that's intended to Tmax films when used in high contrast
scenes. I haven't gotten around to trying it yet but it does offer promise. There's
also Diafine. :-)

: I'm onto Efke films right now. I'll revisit TM next year.

I'm interested in hearing how it works out for you. I've been thinking of giving their
iso 25 a try. I'm not sure of what developer to use with it though.

: I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last
: summer. She
: use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were
: spectactularSP?!!

: I'm a Rodinal _freak_ so I want to believe.

I know that's why I mentioned it. :-)

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

jjs wrote:
: "Frank Pittel" wrote in message
: ...
: jjs wrote:

: I see that your position on Kodak's T-grain films are starting to soften.
: :-)

: A little. I appreciate the straight-line 'curve' for flat light situations.
: I haven't been able to cope with high-contrast scenes. In fact, I become so
: despondent that I held a film burning for the whole lot of exposed
: negatives. That's a Bad Thing.

The TM films are intended to be used with the zone system. You can control the contrast
with reduced development. I haven't figured out what to do with the 10 stop scenes we
get a lot of here in the midwest. I have found a developer from photographers formulary
(I think that's the name) that's intended to Tmax films when used in high contrast
scenes. I haven't gotten around to trying it yet but it does offer promise. There's
also Diafine. :-)

: I'm onto Efke films right now. I'll revisit TM next year.

I'm interested in hearing how it works out for you. I've been thinking of giving their
iso 25 a try. I'm not sure of what developer to use with it though.

: I also bumped into one of the women that I took a LF workshop with last
: summer. She
: use TMX with rodinal diluted at 1:150. The results she got were
: spectactularSP?!!

: I'm a Rodinal _freak_ so I want to believe.

I know that's why I mentioned it. :-)

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

"Frank Pittel" wrote in message
...

The TM films are intended to be used with the zone system. You can control
the contrast
with reduced development. I haven't figured out what to do with the 10
stop scenes we
get a lot of here in the midwest. I have found a developer from
photographers formulary
(I think that's the name) that's intended to Tmax films when used in high
contrast
scenes. I haven't gotten around to trying it yet but it does offer
promise. There's
also Diafine. :-)

I know the Zone System, and use a modified version. (Forgive me, ZS-ers!)

: I'm onto Efke films right now. I'll revisit TM next year.

I'm interested in hearing how it works out for you. I've been thinking of
giving their
iso 25 a try. I'm not sure of what developer to use with it though.

Well, I got five bottles of Neofin Blue which is supposed to be good with
Efke 25, so I'll give it a go and let you know IF I ever, ever get to the
field anytime soon!