Tri-X in TMax developer

[lido]

Does anyone have any experience with Tri-X in TMax developer? I used to shoot TMax 100 and have a bottle of developer left. My concern would be grain size etc. Back when I used Pentax MX, I vaguely remember trying this and didn't like it. Tried hard, but can't find the negatives to double check.

How about HC-110? Can't you tell I don't like working with powder developers (D76) 😉.

Any insight would be appreciated.

 

[meyman]

The lab I give my negs to uses t-max exclusively [machine processing] and as I shoot tri-x only, my laziness sort of condemns me to this combination. I'm abroad at the moment so cannot post any samples before the end of next week. The results however are mixed, ranging from "traditional" - medium sized grain, rather high contrast and excellent sharpness [60's reportage or typical tri-x character] to horrific grain and shadow loss [in comparison Merciful's asa 120000 experiments have lovely tonal gradation]. In part this is most certainly due to my lame sunny 16 skills. I suspect however that additionally t-max imust be a very unforgiving developer. That's it from me. Let someone wiser elaborate.
Cheers, Maciek

 

[ChrisPlatt]

At an exhibition yesterday the photographer told me
she used Tri-X 120 film developed in TMax developer.

The grain in her ~16x16" inkjet prints was subtle, but there, and quite pleasing.

Her main reason for choosing TMax developer is that she does not
wish to use powdered chemicals (which I thoroughly understand!).

I wondered how they'd have looked if developed in HC110
and suggested she try that as well...

Chris

 

[MadMan2k]

I've only used TMax dev so far, and I did a couple rolls of tri-x in it. It looked alright to me, but again I didn't have anything to compare it to... I'm more concerned with what happens before and while I take the picture than the tonal gradiations from the chemicals I use.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

When I first saw the prints I thought they were conventional process.
The photographer relocated two years ago and lost her wet darkroom.
I was surprised to learn that the scanner and inkjet printer used were consumer grade.
According to the photographer the cost of the archival inkjet paper and inks used exceeded that of conventional photographic paper.

Chris

 

[Never Satisfied]

I've nearly always use T-max dev to process my Tri-X. It's a great GP developer and makes nice negs.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

FWIW TMax developer is by Kodak's own ratings not a fine-grain developer:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/chemistry/bwFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml

Chris

 

[lZr]

TMAX is modern developer and is one offered by Kodak. It is beautiful for TMAX and Trix films. Not cheap and you are asked to dilute it 1:4. I use now HC-110 dil B or dil H for every roll I shot - TMAX, HP5+, TRIX. HC-110 is more flexible and cheap.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

HC110 is my favorite general purpose developer, too.

Chris

 

[sirius]

Hi here is what works for me.

Expose tri-x as ISO 200.

Develop at 20 degrees C for 6.5 minutes. Agitate vigorously for the first 15 seconds and then for 5 seconds every 30.

I got this advice from someone who shot tri-x for 40 years and his photos are lovely, lots of shadow detail, tonal range and fine grain. Though, he was not using this developer.

hope this helps

 

[kipkeston]

I've tried it, It creates ugly grain and I don't like it. I use xtol now.

 

[sirius]

Tri-X @ 400 ISO f4 1/60 with a different developer mix than recommended above: 24 degrees 3.5 min

 

[fbf]

very nice. I love the contrast.

 

[schow]

mixed, yet good results

mixed, yet good results

I recently shot tri-x@800 and developed in TMAX, and I got good results though they were a little inconsistent.

Here's what I mean. The following photos were scanned in directly.
In these shots, I see a sort of sepia tone:

While here, the results are more "traditional" looking.

I'm not displeased with the results at all, I just don't know why the results were split half/ half on the sepia like tones and the traditional look. Any ideas?


Sherm

 

[charjohncarter]

You asked about Tmax100 in HC-110. Here it is with my processing and post processing using dilution H:

 

[charjohncarter]

Or Tri-X @ 250 using HC-110h:

 

[NickTrop]

charjohncarter - love the tonality of these. HC110. Hmmmm never fooled with that one. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[Trius]

Agreed, especially that Tri-X shot, exposure and dev really were nailed.

Sherm: It looks like you may have scanned the first two as colour negatives, the 2nd two as monochrome.

 

[TheHub]

How about HC-110?

Tri-X 400, HC-110 dilution B, 21˚ for 7:30 http://life-electronic.net/blog/?p=570


I like HC-110 now that I've learned how to use it properly. D-76 doesn't give me the grain I'm looking for.

 

[schow]

Sherm: It looks like you may have scanned the first two as colour negatives, the 2nd two as monochrome.

Hmm, that's entirely possible. My cousin and I were having a few drinks while scanning these on his computer. However, we did all the scanning in single sitting so I'm not sure how the settings on the computer would have been changed. Anyhow, I'm quite satisfied with the results regardless.