Re: [Leica] Brassai

[Paul and Paula Butzi <butzi@halcyon.com>]

At 10:26 AM 4/24/98 , you wrote:
>Is this Tmax + highly dilluted Tmax developer the hot ticket these days, or
>is John Sexton just using the stuff because it comes in Readyloads?

When I took John's workshop, he was using TMX in readyloads for
most everything, with occasional use of TMY (not available in readyloads)
when he needed more film speed, and Tech Pan for situations where he
needed massive contrast increase (e.g. N+4 or more).  (Tech Pan is
also not available in readyloads).

My understanding then was that he was developing nearly all of it in TMax-RS
diluted 1+9.  4x5 sheet film is processed the Jobo 3010 or whatever the
six sheet 4x5 version is (3006?).  The small amount of roll film he uses
is apparently processed in the Jobo on stainless reels.  (Note that TMax-RS
and TMax developers are not the same, and TMax developer is not 
recommended for developing Tmax sheet films because of problems
with dichroic fog).)

For really massive contractions he processes the film in a tray in very
dilute developer.  The film goes in a plastic separator he built, and
the film is processed with little agitation and long development times.
As others have commented, you can see the filaments in the light
bulbs in some of the photos made this way.

>
>Looking to settle in on one black-and-white film/developer combo and wish to
>begin film testing shortly, but I'm in no mood to test everything out there!
>Tri-X in HC110 has been mentioned elsewhere (Fred Picker's Zone VI Workshop,
>'74 ed), but the info was many years old, so I dunno if this is still a good
>way to go? Actual working film speed of 100-200 would be great. 50 is
>getting a little low, and 25's definitely so for all but the stillest of
>days.

I just finished a sort of lazy film evaluation.  For 35mm work, I've
settled on
TMY (TMax-400), with occasional rolls of TMZ (Tmax 3200p).  I expose the
TMY at about ei200.  TMZ is exposed at either ei800 or ei1600 and is used
only as a last resort.

I tried and rejected the Ilford Delta films.  Tri-X was a runner up to TMY,
mostly due to grain.

I didn't try FP-4 or HP-5, nor did I try Plus-X.  For a 100 speed film, 
I use TMX (TMax-100), which is also the film I use for nearly all 4x5
work.

>
>Suggestions would be most welcome before I go out and buy hundreds of feet
>of the wrong stuff!

If your processing is very consistent, I'd suggest that you try TMY, which I
think is a nice balance of speed, sharpness, and grain for 35mm work.  If
you work in consistently good light, I'd suggest TMX.

If your processing is not absolutely consistent, or you need to process film
under varying conditions (differing water supplies, etc) then I'd suggest
Tri-X, which slightly more grainy than TMY but far more tolerant of
processing fluctuations.  

If I were you, I'd try to expose half a dozen rolls of TMY and Tri-X and see
how you feel about the differences.  If you have more than one body, I'd
suggest exposing them to the same scenes and doing a direct comparison.

In the end, it's probably more important that you become intimately
familiar with
whatever you choose than which choice you make.  None of the films
from Kodak or Ilford are bad - in fact, I think that the choice of stellar
films we have right now is an embarrassment of riches.


- -Paul