TD3 and Tech Pan

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

Hi all,

I'm about to try to increase my base of materials with Tech Pan. I've purchased a few rolls and some TD3 from Photographer's Formulary (htttp://www.photoformulary.com/). They claim that I'll get an ISO of 50 to 100 without an increase in grain with this developer. More specificly, they claim grainless 16x20's (I assume from 35mm) Never having shot Tech Pan, let alone Tech Pan in 35mm (I'll be using a 645), I wonder if the claims (if true) compare well to Tech Pan in general (in which case the speed increase is the main difference)?

If anyone here has tried the combination and has any good or bad impressionss to share I'd appreciate it. I've already got the materials, and I'll be trying it anyway, I was just wondering what to expect (as it may affect what subjects I try this on.)

Thanks,

Paul

-- Paul D. Robertson (proberts@clark.net), January 14, 2000

Answers

Paul,

Please post your results. I also picked up some TD-3, but will not be able to test it for a couple of weeks.

Thanks,

-- Harry Pluta (hspluta@msn.com), January 14, 2000.


I shot 35mm TP with PMK pyro quite a lot (few hundred rolls), and I was never happy with anything larger than 11x14, shot with Zeiss 50mm f1.4 lens. But your results with TD3 may differ (though I can't see how much with such a speed increase?). TP is a beautiful film, and I am dying to shoot it in medium format....

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), January 14, 2000.

Don't forget there's more to a good print than grain, and TP will fall apart just as easily as any other emulsion in regards to all things which are 'limiting factors' of a 35mm-sized negative...

But I'm sure you know that.

...and I guess I'm being a snob, though I don't mean to...shawn

:-)

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), January 14, 2000.


I guess I wasn't clear, I'll be using 120 film in my 645, not 35mm. I'm assuming that their claims of grainless 16x20's from 35mm have some merit, but I wasn't sure what the film/developer combination was going to give me, or if the same claims were true of Tech Pan in almost any developer. 11x14 from a 35mm in pyro seems to me to say that the developer may not be that much of a factor here?

I was also trying to get a feeling of if I'd be happier shooting landscape/wildlife images or going down to the Mall and shooting monuments for the first few rolls.

Lastly, I was hoping that someone could provide some feedback on the speed issue, it'd be nice have an inkling of where this 50 to 100 ISO range stands in reality.

I'll follow up after I've done my first few rolls.

Paul

-- Paul D. Robertson (proberts@clark.net), January 14, 2000.


I tried TD-3 with TechPan about ten years ago. It worked very well, but the claims for very high speeds from it did not pan out for me. I'd say EI 25 is still optimum.

-- (edbuffaloe@unblinkingeye.com), January 14, 2000.


The 16x20 results are subjective, of course. So is "grain-free:" at what distance is a print grain-free? Twice its diagonal? Under a 4x loupe?

If you can, try and find out what the gamma of TP in TD-3 is from the Formulary before you use it: I've not found a "magic soup" for this film which delivers low gamma and high(er) speed.

In my experience, TP is what it is, like Popeye --- it'll never be a fast film, it'll never see N-1, and it's still not really grainy even if you soup it in Dektol.

-- John O'Connell (joconnell@adelphia.net), January 14, 2000.


oops, you were clear, said you'd be shooting 645. I am just blind...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), January 14, 2000.

>>Lastly, I was hoping that someone could provide some feedback on the speed issue, it'd be nice have an inkling of where this 50 to 100 ISO range stands in reality

Check out Gene Crumpler's posts here and at photo.net. He claims a true ISO of I think 100ISO with Diafine. He seems to have a lot of experience with TP, having gone through a large number of developers trying to dial it in to his taste...

But with my experience, which is with PMK and Technidol, TP does not go gracefully with even 1 stop underexposure.

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), January 14, 2000.


It does seem to give an increase in film speed by about a stop but I still shoot it at 25. Better shadow detail and higher accutance than I was getting with Technidol. Grain is still super fine. Gene Crumpler left a thread somewhere in here about his experiences with Diafine. It was about a thousand years or so ago and I can't find it. If anybody can dig it up let me know.

-- Walter Massa (massacam@aol.com), January 16, 2000.

...yeah it's getting big enough to warrant a search engine and categories, such as "TMX", "TMY", "PMK", "ETC"...well, not the ETC...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), January 16, 2000.


In my experience, TD-3 does everything Photographers Formulary promises. I've shot TP in my Hasselblad at ISO 50 and found the results with TD-3 to be excellent. The shadow detail is there and it gives beautiful tonality. I used the Formulary's "acutance" method of developing with agitation every 3 minutes. The sharpness and absence of grain are pretty amazing.

-- Brian Hinther (BrianH@sd314.k12.id.us), January 19, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ