# Stepping Out



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

Camera: OM2N
Film: Kodak Tmax 400
Lens: Zuiko-50mm 
Developed in Kodak Tmax developer, 1:4 dilution for 7 minutes @ 68 degrees.




Stepping Out by Nokinrocks, on Flickr


----------



## timor (Aug 17, 2012)

Hi. Title is funny, I would never think about it this way.
Alan, are you shooting film on regular bases ? From this shot judging frame is overexpose or overdeveloped. My money is on the first case.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

timor said:


> Hi. Title is funny, I would never think about it this way.
> Alan, are you shooting film on regular bases ? From this shot judging frame is overexpose or overdeveloped. My money is on the first case.


 Timor, I have been shooting film for about 6 months. This is actually one of my earlier shots and development attempts, I might have posted it in the film forum (can't remeber). It could be overexposed, kind of hard to meter, shady forest with sun from the back right side of the tree. .. Thanks for the CC.


----------



## timor (Aug 17, 2012)

OK. I see. I am asking cause the mushroom is totally white. It is a problem with averaging light meters and the fact, that Tmax film needs very exact exposure, otherwise is easily blocking the highlights. Maybe for now you should stick with TX, is more forgiving. Especially in this kind of light situation. With 35 mm film on which is many frames is not very practical to use +/- developments technique. I do that, but I sacrifice a lot of film shooting short rolls (12-18 frames) for one subject or in single light conditions. Also there are some different dev techniques,(quite simple) which can help.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

I don't bracket a lot because of the expense, but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for future shots. Any dev advice would be appreciated. Thanks Again....


----------



## Rick58 (Aug 17, 2012)

I really like this, but as mentioned, the face of the mushy is slightly washed out, but just slightly. 
It's refreshing for me. Straight B&W film and darkroom work like the good old days of photography, before the days of computer manipulation. Nice.


----------



## KenC (Aug 17, 2012)

timor said:


> Tmax film needs very exact exposure, otherwise is easily blocking the highlights



In my experience Tmax films did not block up that easily, but the highlights had a lot of density and could be difficult to print for full detail (or scan, I guess).  It depends on developing conditions, etc., and I used to go just a bit light on the recommended times to make the highlights easier to deal with, but I didn't usually see complete blocking under any conditions.

My first reaction to the image was that a different angle would have been better because the stems in the background are distracting.  You could make them darker and you might also be able to re-scan and recover that detail (didn't you do this on another image you posted?).


----------



## timor (Aug 17, 2012)

AlanE said:


> I don't bracket a lot because of the expense, but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for future shots.


 You see ? That's the problem, But I don't bracket to. I am using spot meter to get my exposure.
Developer you are using is top quality. You may try 1+9 for one shot. More reliable results.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

Thanks Rick...


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

KenC said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > Tmax film needs very exact exposure, otherwise is easily blocking the highlights
> ...



Point taken... I believe it was detail on the bridge shot. You got me, I have been busy tying flies for an upcoming Yellowstone trip and have neglected my photography homework.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

timor said:


> AlanE said:
> 
> 
> > I don't bracket a lot because of the expense, but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for future shots.
> ...




I definitely need a spot meter ... Is 1:9 more reliable? more room for error? properly developed same results with each?


----------



## tirediron (Aug 17, 2012)

Have you tried Ilford B&W film?  I found it to be much more forgiving, especially at the lower ISOs.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

tirediron said:


> Have you tried Ilford B&W film? I found it to be much more forgiving, especially at the lower ISOs.



I like Ilford 125... At some point I will need to pick one or two films. I have been using several different brands which makes it hard to maintain consistent results. 

OM2N Zuiko 50 mm Ilford 125 FP Plus TMAX Dev 1:4 8 min @ 68 degrees 





Bridge Bolts by Nokinrocks, on Flickr


----------



## timor (Aug 17, 2012)

AlanE said:


> Is 1:9 more reliable? more room for error? properly developed same results with each?


What is more reliable is one time use of chemical. First there is no guessing of dev time as it is with multiple use, second the risk of oxidation (spoiling of the working solution) is much limited. This way every time you know exactly, what you doing. Developer in lower concentration work gentler, with more compensating effect and more acutation. Also grain is finer. There is a multitude of development combinations, at some point you will find one, which fits you best, but you have to try. Very popular and cost effective is D76 1+1 or 1+2 one shot and is said, that this way one can achieve better negative, then in full strength D76. I agree. It looks like too great concentration of reducing agents is not that helpful.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 17, 2012)

timor said:


> ...Very popular and cost effective is D76 1+1 or 1+2 *one shot *and is said, that this way one can achieve better negative, then in full strength D76. I agree. It looks like too great concentration of reducing agents is not that helpful.


^^This!  Reusing chemicals is cost-effective, but not worth it in the long run, especially for developer.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 17, 2012)

I normally toss out the developer but reuse the fixer, adding back to a 1 gallon premixed jug. I also premix my developer 1 gallon at a time but it may sit for up to a month before I use it all. 

Although I am careful about my developer temperature, I do not worry as much about the fixer. Is that a problem?


----------



## Rick58 (Aug 17, 2012)

Being a maintenance supervisor, I really enjoy these industrial shots. Those front bolts are razor sharp.


----------



## timor (Aug 17, 2012)

tirediron said:


> ^^This!  Reusing chemicals is cost-effective, but not worth it in the long run, especially for developer.


Reusing chemicals was OK when we were shooting b&w for memories from vacation and printed 4x6. Now the philosophy is to get the best negative possible and then what we gonna save ? 50 cents ? Negative is everything.
Fixer could be bought in fluid form. I usually mix two 500 ccm and use two stage fixing. Temperature of all fluids is important, even wash, especially with Tmax films which are very thin and jump in temp. may crack the emulsion and may have influence on size of the grain.


----------



## AlanE (Aug 18, 2012)

Thanks again Rick, glad you like it.


Timor - Good Information, I appreciate the tips.


----------

