Development times for PMK/Tech Pan

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

I need develpoment times for TP in PMK. I shoot the film at EI 12. I've gotten some suggestions but they are minutes apart so I would appreciate a true time from someone who actually uses this combo. Thanks.

-- Walter Massa (WFMassa@webtv.net), May 29, 2000

Answers

Hey Walter, I'm a little leary giving times, because mine are always so radically different than others. One of these days, I'm gonna do sensitometric tests against known negatives from another photographer...and realize how way off I am. But I am digressing.

I think the best way to get times for TP is to shoot some test rolls, honestly. I can usually fudge on the processing with other emulsions-- I know, for examply, if I grab practically any film, rate it at about 2/3 manufacturer speed, and develop it in either Rodinal or PMK at my regular dilutions, I can get a printable negative if I develop it for 8 minutes. 8 minutes is my starting time for all emulsions other than TP, and I usually end up backing off from there. Anyways I'm still digressing...

The point is this wouldn't work for me with TP/PMK. Even with Technidol, processing variances of even 1 minute make big density differences.

It is 'crucial' with PMK to keep your agitation cycles short and close together. I do about 2-3 seconds every 15 seconds. I would go 1- 2 seconds every 10 seconds if I really thought about it, because, as GH says, the longer cycling typical of other developers does not work with PMK, I know myself cuz I've ruined film that way (cycling mistakenly to Rodinal specs...).

Experiment. You've got a good base ISO to begin with. Are you shooting 35mm? If so, get the bulk rolls.

Anyways I don't know if I'm being helpful or just rambling on. So That's all for now...shawn

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), May 30, 2000.


These are some examples of TP at EI16 with PMK...

http://causasui.homestead.com/katcat.html

http://causasui.homestead.com/barbfave.html

http://causasui.homestead.com/3kat11.html

...please don't judge the site itself, I've given up on it cuz it's terrible...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), May 30, 2000.


Walter emailed me in regards to my pics, and I decided to respond here, since I went into my 'technique' a little for TP/PMK. Keep in mind I'm far from the most methodical photographer...Anyways:

There is no filtration on those prints, Walter. Actually, it's just straight. I don't even use a UV filter, just a hood for protection/contrast control (these were all Contax S2 w/ 50mm f1.4). The skin is a result of TP's extra red sensitivity (about 2 stops) and fairly high contrast printing (I generally start at 70cc's magenta and work UP from there, getting as high a contrast as possible while keeping as much of the lows as possible, and all of the highs...). I can't stress how important it has been for ME PERSONALLY to stick with N- (re: A. Adams) development. I get FLAT negatives, and control contrast at the printing stage. I think a full gamma TP/PMK neg, i.e., fully developed, would be practically lith if printed at even 70cc's magenta...

As for the flatness, I had a rude awakening yesterday. I went to a pro lab to have some nice, full-rebate 4x6 proofs done for my best friend (pics of her daughter sleeping) with negs I'd just developet myself (APX 100 with Rodinal 1:50 for 6 minutes...). When I got them back, they were TERRIBLE, no whites, no blacks, just lots of middle grey...

Give lots of exposure (but not too much to destroy/waste the resolving power/sharpness/acutance/whatever-it's-called of TP), cut back on the development, and control contrast through printing on VARIABLE contrast paper. Hope this helps.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), May 31, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ