I want to get the best tonality (ie. the largest latitude) on a negative & still have acutance. Chromogenic films like Tmax CN400 have huge latitude but they don't give me the acutance I want; in the meantime acutance films like TX & HP5 won't have such latitude when developed in acutance developer (rodinal or DK50- I didn't try FX1 yet). So the question is: how to keep both? What about Perceptol: can anyboy coment about it's tonality & acutance when used with TX or PXP?

-- xosni (xosni@gega.net), February 21, 2001

Answers

I recently posted a similar question (no responses). I use HP5+, rated @320, developed in Perceptol, 1:1, 15min., 68 degrees. Other than the film speed rating, those are Ilford recommended time/temp/dilutions. I also use a #8 yellow filter all of the time.

Since Perceptol is supposed to have a compensating effect, you should be able to see a slight softening of the edges, which I do. However, my negs still have quite a pop to them, so I am happy with the acutance. I get a wide tonal range, good highlights and good blacks and really nice shadow detail. I haven't tried Plus-X, but I've tried HP5, Tri-X, FP4, AgfaPan, TMax and Delta in Rodinal as well at various dilutions. I personally do not care for the grain and contrast I get with Rodinal.

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 21, 2001.

Try 2-bath or divided developers. Diafine, divided D-76, etc.

Compensation should allow longer tonal range, and if you don't agitate too much, you should achieve high accutance and not get "soft edges".

Another alternative is "stand development". See Anchell & Troop's Film Developing Cookbook.

-- Charlie Strack (charlie_strack@sti.com), February 21, 2001.

If you keep trying this stuff with small formats you will continue to be disappointed & spend years searching for magic answers where there are none. Purchase an old 8x10 with a lens (doable for $400 or less) and a couple of holders and contact print the negatives. Then most of the worries of 35mm will disappear as you have nice contact prints big enough to see. You can shoot with pretty much whatever you want and concentrate on the image rather than the process.

-- Dan Smith (shooter@brigham.net), February 21, 2001.

But how you compare all these methods to using Tmax CN400? Do you get the same tonal range?

And what kind of agitation do you recommend to keep the edge contrast.., every one minute? for how long? And do you advise it with perceptol?

-- xosni (xosni@gega.net), February 22, 2001.

I have not used it with 35mm, only 120, but I love the results I am getting with Agfa 100. After some fine tuning, I shoot it at ei 80, use Rodinol 1:50, 14 minutes @68. Agitate continuos for first minute, then 5 seconds every 30 seconds. With this combo the majority of my negatives print easily on # 2 paper on my cold light head enlarger. Black blacks, unblocked highlights, and really wonderful grays. I am just getting started again in b+w after several years with no darkroom. Prior to that I had settled on Tmax 100 in Rodinol, but the contrast was tough to control. This is the best combo I have found thus far. Hope this helps.

-- Bruce Appel (Appelgate@aol.com), February 22, 2001.

Forgot to mention that I have not used the chromogenic films much, but what I have done, I don't care for. Wide lattitude yes, but hard to get good blacks, and they don't have the "pop" that I get with traditional b+w. I guess I am a crumudgeon.

-- Bruce Appel (appelgate @aol.com), February 22, 2001.

Dan Smith is right. Tonality and image quality are a product of negative size. Not to say that you can not get good images from smaller formats but it is more luck, the right conditions all comming together. I love to work in the darkroom and went from 35mm to 120 to 4x5 in a short period of time to get the image quality that I was looking for in my photos. Have fun.

-- Jeff White (jeff@jeffsphotos.com), February 22, 2001.

Anyone like to give a simple definition of the term "actuance"?

-- Ed Hurst (BullMoo@hotmail.com), February 22, 2001.

This thread has gone on for a while now and no one's mentioned PMK, so I thought I'd jump in. I know there are those who don't care for it, but for me PMK has been the magic bullet. It produces very sharp negatives with HP5+, the stain masks grain, and with variable contrast papers it allows an incredible contrast range. The tonality is such that prints can appear three dimensional. You might want to give it a shot.

-- Brian Hinther (BrianH@sd314.k12.id.us), February 22, 2001.

I have to agree with Charlie Stark... two bath developers especially Diafine. You will be pleasantly surprised with the results with your non T grained films!!!

-- Scott Walton (f64sw@hotmail.com), February 22, 2001.

Hey Ed, Acutance means, simply, edge sharpness.

-- Xosni (xosni@gega.net), February 23, 2001.

I'm afraid I agree with the comments re Perceptol & 35mm. Up until recently, my usual combination has been Delta 400 (35mm, usually exposed at either ISO 320 or 200) developed in perceptol; sometimes at 1:1, other times at 1:2. Either way, I've always been very very happy with the fine grain and vast tonality range - all the subtle shadow details showing - BUT the compromise was edge sharpness. When I first used this combination, when I made my first few batches of prints, I thought my new enlarger lens was a bit 'soft' but it turned out to be the effect of the developer. My usual print size is in the range 9x12 and 11x14. But, of course when such prints are viewed from a minimum distance of 18 inches, the lack of sharpness is no longer apparant. Reducing agitation for me resulted in unevenly developed negatives.

I'm now experimenting with X-tol. When I eventually win lotto and buy my 6x7 system, I intend to return to using perceptol.

-- Frank (falvaro@ozemail.com.au), February 24, 2001.