The Kodak T-MAX Accident.

[mannytrombon]

OK, one year later but, I've used tmax 100 at box speed and pushed to 400 also and I love it. At 400 you get more contrast but lot of details!

[mamiyapress]

There is nothing wrong with T-Max 400, the problem is with your processing methods, if you can not get Tmax developer try D76 1+1 20degC for 11 minutes, 4 inversions per minute, Lady Grey is re branded Tmax 400.You will have to shoot a few rolls to get the feel of the film as it is very prone to improper development. If you want grain, use Rodinal and if you want smoother tones, use Perceptol at 200 asa, a yellow filter is also useful to enhance contrast slightly.

[minisla]

Just purchased tmax 100 and 400 not sure if I like the look of the photos not enough contrast look very flat.

[Igaluit]

Sorry, Upsala is in Sweden. You'll have the same results for T-max 100. I'm happy with T-Max 400. Here's a tip: Next time shoot a blank frame in the film (with lens cap on). Once the film is developed, if you have an enlarger, fix enlarger head at a decent height and close down lens quite a bit. Then, expose that frame in increments of 2 or 3 seconds on the paper. Wait for print to dry and then look for point that gives you maximum black (in other words, the print won't get any blacker with more exposure) and how many seconds that takes. Now, use that exact enlarger height and f.stop to judge all your other prints. If maximum black came at 14 secs of exposure, then expose tests strips of all your negatives for that time. If the prints come out too dark, then you are underexposing that film. If your prints come out too light, then you overexposed. If most of your prints are coming out too dark, but look right with 1/2 the exposure at 7 secs, then you should probably shoot the 400asa film at 200, and so on. You might be able to do this from scanning by tweaking the brightness sliders on the blank frame till you just reach the maximum black point. if it was +5, then apply that adjustment to all your negatives to evaluate them. If it takes a -5 adjustment, then do that. This might work for those who don't wet print. Then look at the whites and lighter greys (which are mostly affected by development time). If the whites are too dull, lengthen development a little. If they're washed-out, shorten development. May take a few films and tries to bring both into harmony.

[udiencefne]

Great video. I use T-Max 100 quite a bit for architectural photography. I've never used T-Max 400, but I do see what you mean by the "haunted" look. I'd be interested in trying some while shooting some abandoned buildings nearby. Keep up the great work!

[abigailsockeye]

The film is fine. Your camera was used in a murder and is haunted.

[tomislavmiletic_]

I was never found of Tmax 100. Tmax 400 yes, good for pushing, sports, concerts and so on but 100? No.
However, Ilford Delta 100, that's something you MUST try out...

[randallstewart]

"Haunting" ?? Is that like "sweet", "bright", and a thousand other terms which impart an emotional definition to a rational analysis? How about what it is herre - low contrast, "flat" beyond any reasonable standard. A scanned image isn't the best way to inspect and evaluate negatives, but my estimate is these are significantly underdeveloped. T-Max is, compared to traditionally manufactured film, very sensitive to over and under development. It does not respond well to traditional compensating developers. Traditional films, like Ilford HP-5+, are more flexible to adjustments and forgiving of user mistakes. IMO, the limitations of T-Max outweigh its marginal advantage in image sharpness, but many will disagree.

[Igaluit]

Sound Dutch. 400 ISO is excellent. Obviously, in 35mm, 100 is probably better. Your pictures needed more development - that's why it's so gray and the whites are so dull.