In article <328680c3.623094011@news.netdoor.com>, guardian@netdoor.com says...

>Anyway, I need a verification on underdeveloping. I just deveoloped a
>roll of TMax 3200 exposed at 3200. I have not processed before, so I
>am wondering if I underdeveloped the film. I the film is the normal
>clear purple, but hte images are lighter than usual. Is is correct to
>assume that it is underdeveloped? I know that I compensated some
>for the colder temperature, but I must have not compensated enough.
>Soon, I will have a heater in the darkroom, but can I just run the
>negatives for a few more minutes to get the tones correct, or are
>those negative toast?

Ummm, er, toast.....;-(
T-Max 3200 is absurdly rated at 3200 - it is more properly rated
around 650-1000 ASA (with normal development for reasonably
normal contrast and optimized sharpness and grain). Some push-type
developers, with considerable loss in quality, can get you up to
around 2-2500 ASA, but any higher is at the cost of great loss
of quality. (BTW, the almost-as-fast [based on shadow recording]
Tri-X can just about keep up with TMZ in virtually every respect,
if processed to optimize the desired characteristics.)
BTW, the purple base color can be minimized by using fresh Rapid
Fix, mixed half again as strong as normal.
If you have access to chrome-alum intensifier (no longer sold in
the US), remarkably weak negatives can be saved with it (each run
through the intensifier adds about 1/2 stop equivalent of overall
density, with acceptable contrast increase limited to about two
passes).
BTW, T-Max films in general require a precision of technique for
consistent results that has so far escaped my abilities....
Hope This Helps