| Photography Forum: Medium Format Photography Forum: |
 |
Q. TMAX 100 & 400 - RB67 ProS - Portraits/Landscape work
Asked by Michael Christensen
(K=37) on 7/29/2002
|
Well, I'm really quite new to medium format - and it's quickly seduced me. I searched through the various galleries to see which pics hit me with the "wow factor" and concluded I've got to try TMAX 100 & 400 for my landscape and portrait work. I use mostly incident metering (Minolta V)and have had mixed results with my Pentax digi-spot meter, the later perhaps reflecting my metering skills.
For portrait work, have you found the need to use yellow or green filters with the TMAX films or are they contrasty enough on their own? and .. any comments on rating it a differnt ISO?
And, for landscape work, that red Tiffen filter produced some dramatic sky/clouds, but my foreground was way too dark - probably should have compensate 1.5 stops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joffre Swait
(K=626) - Comment Date 7/30/2002
|
Michael,
I shoot Tmax 100 a lot in 120 size. I have found that rating it at its nominal ISO rating gives me results I like. Note that I shoot only landscapes, few portraits; however, the few I've done I've been satisfied with.
By the way, most red filter compensation factors are on the order of 8x more light (i.e. 3 stops). This would explain why your landscape was way too dark.
|
|
|
|
David Goldfarb
(K=7611) - Comment Date 7/31/2002
|
I shoot a fair amount of T-Max 100. I like its fine resolution and grain and smooth look, but sometimes wish it had a higher Dmax. My processing times for TMX rollfilm are 12' in D-76 1:1 at 68-deg. F. (20 C.), agitating every 30 sec., and I rate it at EI 80.
I find the midrange tones of T-Max 400 to be kind of muddy. I much prefer Delta 400 either rated at EI 200 in Perceptol (smoother, finer grain) or EI 400 in straight D-76 (not quite as nice as Perceptol, but faster, and higher acutance).
|
|
|
|
jeff callen
(K=506) - Comment Date 10/8/2002
|
Contrast with TMAX 100 seems different than other films,
it appears to have a different yellow spectrum sensitivity
than Tri-X. A neg shot with TMAX 100 looks like I have
used a mild yellow filter as compared to a Tri-X neg.
I've never been a big fan of TMAX 400, but I have conversed by
email with somebody who really likes it and claims that TMY400
just needs much more agitation than most films. I find that
TMAX 100 needs LESS agitaion than other films.
Properly processed TMAX 100 is a very sharp, fine grained film,
rollfilm negs can sometimes produce almost-large-format-quality
prints, but TMAX 400 has never been as predictable for me.
|
|
|
|
|
