Push Processing TMAX 100?

[photophorous]

Does anyone have any experience with pushing TMAX 100 to 400 or higher?

I've read plenty that says Tri-X is better at 400, and is much more accepting of push processing, but I'm stuck with TMAX 100 at the moment.

I'm considering this for a couple of reasons.

1. I took 4 shots already, accidentally exposed for 400 ISO. Not a big deal, really.

2. I still have 32 shots left on this roll, in my only 35mm camera, and I want to take it out tomorrow night for some St. Patty's Day shots. If I could swap film I would, but I don't want to waste the whole roll.

I know I will have to use a flash whether it's 100 or 400, but the background will look better at 400...at least that's what I think. I'll be doing flash shots, some with shutter lag, some with no lag, and some as wide open as f2.8.

If anyone has any general suggestions for how to get the most out of this situation (dark bar, TMAX 100), I'm all ears (or eyes, in this case).

Another question: Since my camera automatically selects film speed, and I don't want to carry my hand held meter, can I just set the exposure compensation to under expose by 2 stops and get the same results as changing the film speed from 100 to 400?

Thanks a bunch!

Paul

[another view]

If anyone has any general suggestions for how to get the most out of this situation (dark bar, TMAX 100), I'm all ears (or eyes, in this case).

Another question: Since my camera automatically selects film speed, and I don't want to carry my hand held meter, can I just set the exposure compensation to under expose by 2 stops and get the same results as changing the film speed from 100 to 400?

Without flash, ISO 1600 or 3200 and f1.4 lenses are pretty much a requirement. Even then, you're lucky to get a handholdable shutter speed. With a little flash, you can change this of course but the look will be different. I'd try a lot of slow (like one second) shutter speed shots, personally - but then you might try a lot of different things to see what works. The one second shutter speed will also give you more background exposure like you mentioned with ISO100 vs. 400.

Yes, two stops under will do the same thing. Sorry, can't help you on the others...

[photophorous]

Thanks AV. I can always count on you to respond.

This is useful information. Your comment about ISO 1600 to 3200 puts things in perspective.

I'll probably go ahead and push it to 400 and try as many different things as my friends will put up with.

I'm always kind of gun shy in a situation like this, so I may chicken out completely.

Thanks again,
Paul

[another view]

Your comment about ISO 1600 to 3200 puts things in perspective.

Thanks Paul - that's what I was trying to do about your quote above. Don't chicken out! Low light photography isn't easy and your first roll (or several rolls) might not give you what you want. Stick with it and you'll get some really cool shots. It's a lot of fun - I need to work on that again myself.

The singer was from outdoor concert about two years ago - Ilford Delta 3200, I think exposed at 3200. No flash but decent stage lighting. If I had to guess, it was an 80-200 f2.8 probably close to the long end of the range, at 2.8 and 1/125 if I was lucky...





Bass player shot is from a small bar, same film but probably 1600, 85 f1.4 probably wide open or close to it and 1/60 (again, if I was lucky).

[yogestee]

Push processing T-Max 100 two stops to 400ISO will work ok..Sure Tri-X or T-Max 400 will give you better results but you are stuck with what you have..
The negative image will be grainy,high in contrast and lack shadow detail but this can be used to good efect..
Are you doing your own processing??
I have had great results pushing Tri-X and Tmax 400 two stops for theatre etc shots..I hand processed these films using Paterson tanks in Kodak D76 or Ilford ID11 developers.

Here is the trick..I roughly increased the developing time by 50% for each stop pushed..So pushing two stops roughly increase developing time by double..BUT,,watch your agitation!! Roughly halve your agitation..It appears if you over agitate while push processing the grains seem to "clump" in the midtones..

Pour the developer into your tank..Give the tank base a good bash on the bench to loosen any bubbles then agitate continously for 30 seconds..I agitate by inverting the tank not by the spindle thingy..One agitation equals an inversion and bringing the tank back upright..Allow the film to rest for a further 60 seconds,,then agitate every 120 seconds..Never ever shake the tank..You don't have to measure the milliseconds but near enough is good enough..All that agitation does is supply fresh developer to the film..

Stop bath.fixer and wash as normal..

Good luck and I'd like to see your results..

Jurgen
Australia

[photophorous]

AV, thanks for the encouragement. I like your photos a lot. Did they just let anyone into those shows with a camera, or did you have some special access?

Jurgen, Thanks for all the advice.

I'm not sure I understand your agitation suggestion. You said, "One agitation equals an inversion and bringing the tank back upright..Allow the film to rest for a further 60 seconds,,then agitate every 120 seconds."

Are you saying every 120 seconds invert the tank, upside down and back, only once?

Thank you both for all your help. I'll deffinitely try to post some if they're not too terrible.

Paul

[photophorous]

I forgot to mention...

Jergen, I use D-76, 1:1, in a single roll 35mm SST tank, if that makes a difference.

AV, I'll be using a 50mm f1.8, because it's the only fast lens I have. Wish it was a 20 or 24mm.

Paul

[another view]

Did they just let anyone into those shows with a camera, or did you have some special access?

Well, they let me in, so their standards can't be too high... Thanks for the kind words.

First one is The Spin Doctors (posted both here before, I think). I've played in bands for a long time and knew the guy running the stage, so he gave me access in exchange for a couple of shots which they used for promo stuff. Second one is from James McMurtry's band (member mtbbrian turned me on to him). I just showed up with a camera at this really small bar and figured that I'd put it away if they said anything, seeing as I saw a bunch of flashes go off already.

Trick is to have an idea what you can get away with when shooting bands. Both are national recording artists and it's usually very tough to get access in cases like this. Outdoor festivals are usually easier to shoot if you don't have access - they can't really stop people from taking pictures. At an indoor concert the security is a lot tighter.

A 50 f1.8 is a fine lens for low light work. A 20 f2.8 (I'm guessing here) can be good too - I can hand hold a 20 at 1/15, but usually 1/30 with a 50 - well, on a good day anyway. Problem is that the f2.8 lens is 1-1/3 stop slower than the f1.8 lens. You can still hand hold either of them in a lot of cases, but the slower shutter speed may be a problem with people moving. Depends on the results you want, of course - but another thought is that the 20 at 2.8 has a ton of depth of field compared to a 50 at 1.8.

[photophorous]

Hi AV,

When you go into a show with your camera, do you just take your camera bag or a back pack or something? How do you deal with the cumbersome gear?

I've seen James McMurtry. He played at the Austin City Limits music festival a few years ago, and I have a couple of his CDs too. He rocks!

What instrument do you play? I play the guitar, but they've been gathering lots of dust since I'm spending more time with my camera. I've been tempted to trade my Taylor in for an 80-200 f2.8, but I know I'd regret it.

Our annual SXSW music thing is going on right now. Tomorrow there's a big outdoor show with Louisiana bands, including the Dirty Dozen Brass Band and Buckwheat Zydeco. I hope they'll let me in with my camera. I'll have to get up close and use my only other lens, a 28-105mm, f3.5-4.5. The show is in the afternoon, so my slow lens should be fast enough.

Paul

[another view]

Paul - didn't mean to hijack the thread, but...

I'm a bass player. Austin is a great place for live music, looking forward to going back again at some point - maybe SXSW which a friend has been to a few times. 80-200 f2.8 is a great and versatile lens to use, but I wouldn't trade a Taylor for it. If you have Nikon, I've got the older non-AFS and non-VR version but it has the tripod collar. Excellent lens, and used it's not too expensive (compared to the latest one anyway). What I bring depends on the circumstances. When I shot film, a lot of times for clubs it would be one body and one lens, probably the 85. For bigger stuff I'd bring my regular bag - whatever I felt like I could get away with and could stand to carry as long as I'd be there.

SXSW might have more photo restrictions than most festivals just based on what I've heard, but it's only a guess. Check the website and see what they say. If asked, it's best not to lie about who you are, what you're doing or if you're working for someone. They can probably spot holes in your story and life won't be so good. Use your contacts - you may know somebody thru playing that can help you.

OTOH, there are a lot of great low-light photo possibilities. Music is just one of them. Good luck and have fun! Have a Chuy's burrito (if you can finish it).

[photophorous]

didn't mean to hijack the thread

No worries. I was just curious. I don't have any kind of contacts through music. I was in a band briefly in high school, when owning a guitar was all the qualifications you needed. I've only regressed since college. Oddly enough, I lost touch with other musically inclined people when I moved to Austin for college. I was in engineering school, and well, you can imagine, there aren't a lot of rock stars in a thermodynamics class.

SXSW is a weird "festival" because it takes place in different venues around town. I suspect the rules are different everywhere, partially depending on the band.

They always have some free shows outdoors. That's what I'll be going to. I found a list of prohibited items, such as coolers, lawn chairs, etc. and there was nothing about cameras, so I guess I'll find out.

Thanks for all the advice. Have a good St. Patrick's Day and weekend.

Paul

[yogestee]

AV, thanks for the encouragement. I like your photos a lot. Did they just let anyone into those shows with a camera, or did you have some special access?

Jurgen, Thanks for all the advice.

I'm not sure I understand your agitation suggestion. You said, "One agitation equals an inversion and bringing the tank back upright..Allow the film to rest for a further 60 seconds,,then agitate every 120 seconds."

Are you saying every 120 seconds invert the tank, upside down and back, only once?

Thank you both for all your help. I'll deffinitely try to post some if they're not too terrible.

Paul

Yes that is right..Invert the tank until the developer stops going "glug glug",then return the tank rightside up.

Jurgen
Australia

[photophorous]

All right, here they are.

Some came out pretty good. Some didn't. Overall, I'm satisfied, considering...

The pub we went to was so crowded we ended up sitting in the parking lot in lawn chairs, so I only got a few inside shots. Most of them didn't get enough exposure.

The first shot here is one I took inside, using a long shutter speed and flash. I'm not crazy about the tilt, but I like the exposure. Better next time.

The rest are of my friends sitting out in the parking lot, all with on camera flash. (gotta watch out for those reflective signs next time)

Thanks for the tips AV and Jurgen.

Oh, and I shot another roll, of the Dirty Dozen Brass Band, this time Tri-X at 800. I plan to post a thread in Viewfinder tomorrow. Check them out if you're interested.

Paul

[another view]

It ain't easy, is it? Really, the shots are fine. It will take some time to get used to working in low light. Reflective signs are like shooting into mirrors - I learned the hard way too. Angles and slow shutter speed w/flash are good techniques (I think it works) but just be careful about over -using either one of them. Ever seen way too many shots with a fisheye? I have, and it's the same sort of thing.

Now, think about how much you learned from this roll of film. And you were thinking about not even bringing a camera... You did good, and I'll look for your other shots later.

[yogestee]

All in all good results photophorous..

Jurgen
Australia