As for your film question, TMAX (400, I assume) compares more closely to Delta 400 from the Ilford line. TMAX/Delta are T grained films, which means that they have finer grain than a comparable ISO film that is traditional (aka cubical) grained. The current generation of 400 Tmax (400 TMY-2) is extremely fine grained for a 400 film, if not the finest grained 400 speed film out there period. I find that one trade off is that Tmax has slightly less latitude than HP5, although I personally like the tonalitly of Tmax better than HP5. I have also found that HP5 is ever so slightly more contrasty than Tmax. I personally think that HP5 looks less realistic compared to Tmax, but with b&w films, that depends as much on your technique and how the film is developed as much as the film itself.
Agree with the above poster. My experience is that traditional B&W films can often have more roll off in the highlights and are a bit more "malleable" with regard to exposure/processing. The newer technology films offer finer grain but at the expense of the above. That's a generalization to some extent but seems to hold true in many cases. I personally prefer the tonality and micro contrast I can get out of something like Tri-X 320 to TMAX 400 when using partial stand development processing techniques. Some people love the tonality of TMAX so it's all very subjective. Best thing to do would be to shoot, shoot, shoot and experiment with different developers/techniques to see what you like.
I'd agree overall with the above. With the caveat that I loathe the tonality of TMax and Delta in general, their very linear tone curves result in a very 'digital' look.
HP5+ is far more flexible with regards to development and exposure than any TMax (you can use just about any developer with decent results and HP5+ is insanely pushable, I typically shoot it at EI 800 or EI 3200).
mawz wrote:
I'd agree overall with the above. With the caveat that I loathe the tonality of TMax and Delta in general, their very linear tone curves result in a very 'digital' look.
HP5+ is far more flexible with regards to development and exposure than any TMax (you can use just about any developer with decent results and HP5+ is insanely pushable, I typically shoot it at EI 800 or EI 3200).
I was trying to be 'diplomatic'. My personal opinion is similar.
Thank very much. I'm just getting into film, and it is pretty exciting. I'm not sure if home-development is in the cards yet though - e.g. not sure how much I can take advantage of the better flexibility of the HP5. I do like it though - got 3 rolls with the camera, and just ordered 5 more. I would like to try the TMAX after that though, just to see how it turns out.
are you shooting 120? or 35mm? If you are shooting 120, I would recommend Tri-x 320, it's a great film It's not made in 35mm though (at least I don't think it is). It's very easy to develop too, it's pretty forgiving (at least it is in HC-110) and seems to hold alot of shadow and highlight detail. Though, I've never done any real comparisons with other films directly.
Daniel Buck wrote:
are you shooting 120? or 35mm? If you are shooting 120, I would recommend Tri-x 320, it's a great film It's not made in 35mm though (at least I don't think it is). It's very easy to develop too, it's pretty forgiving (at least it is in HC-110) and seems to hold alot of shadow and highlight detail. Though, I've never done any real comparisons with other films directly.
joekraft wrote:
Thank very much. I'm just getting into film, and it is pretty exciting. I'm not sure if home-development is in the cards yet though - e.g. not sure how much I can take advantage of the better flexibility of the HP5. I do like it though - got 3 rolls with the camera, and just ordered 5 more. I would like to try the TMAX after that though, just to see how it turns out.
DIY film processing is so cheap and easy it's almost criminal not to do your own......
That's what I hear, but I'm not too big to admit I'm way intimidated. I'm sure I've seen a link before, and ignored it figuring it wouldn't apply to me, but, is there a good resource for getting started - what the minimal requirements are? I shoot both color and B&W. If it is something I could do in an hour or two in the garage, I'm game (all my negatives will be scanned - no making prints from them), but I don't have any room for any kind of wet darkroom.
brucemuir wrote:
especially if you ever get back scratched negs.
Here's something that my uncle told me, and it's ringing true. Pick a film & developer and stay with it for a while. That way you really get to learn how it works, and how it's affected by changes. Switching films all the time is a good way to spin your wheels. But if you know your film real good, you'll know when it's time to grab a different film if your situation demands more than what your current film can do
So far however, the only thing that I've not been satisfied with when using Tri-x 320 is the fact that Kodak no longer sell it in 50 sheet boxes for 8x10 (only 10 sheets per box now!!! That's annoying!). And now that I'm getting into flash shooting, the 320 speed is just a little to fast for me to keep my apertures more open where I want them, so I've been trying some slower films, 25 and 100 speed Adox and Arista EDU.
As for developing, B&W is easy as pie. You really only need two chemicals, a developer, and a fixer. With alot of rapid fixers, you don't need a stop bath (other than just water!). And I also put in a few drops of LFN wetting agent into my final rinse. You can surely do it in a few hours (much less!), unless you have alot of rolls. (not including drying time) I don't even have a dark room, I just use a changing tent and daylight tanks.
Daniel Buck wrote:
As for developing, B&W is easy as pie. You really only need two chemicals, a developer, and a fixer. With alot of rapid fixers, you don't need a stop bath (other than just water!). And I also put in a few drops of LFN wetting agent into my final rinse. You can surely do it in a few hours (much less!), unless you have alot of rolls. (not including drying time) I don't even have a dark room, I just use a changing tent and daylight tanks.
For a stop bath I use white vinegar! I have a windowless laundry room and load films into the tank in there....at night so no light anywhere. Start to finish is about 30 minutes ( not counting drying time)...I hang the negs from the shower curtain rail overnight. All the kit can be obtained from ebay for about £30.
Film dev times available via Google normally. For a novice I'd suggest a film like FP4plus.. It will tolerate a bit of over / under development...scans beautifully...and can be pushed or pulled if required ( but not that necessary if scanning..infact; pushing probably not that advisable anymore...pulling brings in a better tonal range I think).
I've never bothered with colour.....more complicated, and I stick to digital capture for colour anyway.
Ok then... *I* think TMY blows HP5+ out of the water on all counts!
The current TMY-II is the finest grained 400 speed b&w film ever and has greater latitude than anything else I have ever used.
HP5+ is a pleasing old school emulsion... but if you are going that route *I* think TX is Godhead... so take my opinions for what they are worth.
Honestly, I think TMX and TMY are the best b&w films ever... (once you learn to develop them correctly I guess, but I never had the problems that others on line seem to have had).
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I was trying to be 'diplomatic'. My personal opinion is similar.
PS I have been stand developing my TMX and TMY in Rodinal 1:100 and taking a full 1-stop push... very happy with the results... very sharp and classic tonality.
mh2000 wrote:
PS I have been stand developing my TMX and TMY in Rodinal 1:100 and taking a full 1-stop push... very happy with the results... very sharp and classic tonality.
I stand develop in Rodinal 1:64 or HC110 as well, depending on what I am processing. Stand development was the only way I was ever able to exhaust the developer in the highlights with Tmax and get any sort of meaty, micro contrast in the mid to upper mid-tones yet it still always seems compressed to what the old school emulsions are capable of. I have not tried Tmax in a number of years so perhaps it has improved.
I never understood why Tmax films have always been the most controversial b&w emulsions ever... back when I bought my first roll it was a brand new film that I didn't know anything about, didn't even know what tabular grain was... threw the roll in D76 and was really wowed! by it... much better grain and tonality than I ever got out of Plus-X... but whenever I start raving about it over the years at least half the people I talk to tell me about how horrible it is for them... the other half seems to feel like I do that it is the best...
The good thing about b&w film is that there seem to be people getting truly excellent results from all the available emulsions... best to just find one that works for you without much effort and just hone your process around that one.
I haven't processed film in several years, but when I did, Tmax 100 & 400 were my favourite films. To bring out more tonality and grain (yes, I like grain) I used Agfa Rodinal developer. A killer combination imho.
It's not made in 35mm though (at least I don't think it is). It's very easy to develop too, it's pretty forgiving (at least it is in HC-110) and seems to hold alot of shadow and highlight detail. Though, I've never done any real comparisons with other films directly.