At which speed do you rate Tri-X

pau3

pau3

Well-known
Local time
11:49 PM
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
206
Hi,

I've checked that the speed of Tri-X with
my developer (something called gradonal, local brew)
is around 200.

Which is your experience developing Tri-X with other
developers like D76, Xtol, HC-110, Perceptol or Microphen?
Is its speed closer to the nominal speed or is more or less
around 200?

Thanks,
Pau
 
Rodinal - 250 to 320, depending on if I need that stop or not (250 is getting kinda slow, after all)
D76 - 320
Microphen - 560, sometimes 640 - haven't quite gotten it down yet
 
Microphen gives you more speed, by far (it is like one and a half stops).
Do you like the results, in terms of grain and acutance?

Pau
 
I have never found a developer to give me more than 2/3 of a stop, max. This is based on _my_ testing methods.

And you asked me what I rate it at. If the point was for you to tell me what you rate it at or what I should be rating it at, then you should've phrased your question differently :)

allan
 
Allan,

First of all, thanks for your answer. I know that there can be differences
on the speed of a films using different developers. I rated Tri-X at 200
with my developer as the speed which gives certain density
for zone I.

Although I like the results with my developer, I find them
a bit slow and I was wondering if anyone else has made similar tests.
Since you have tested microphen (and it really produces a higher speed),
I was wondering if the how did you like the results (for instance, does
microphen control the highlights? my developer is a compensating
developer, which is one of the things I like)

Hope my comments are clearer now ;-)
Pau
 
Pau,
Ah. It is clearer. I was just confused when you asked what others rate TXT at, then tell me that I am basically wrong...

My testing is not done via Zone I, to be honest. It's a "sloppy" testing method using test shots and scanning, then adjustments. I don't use a densitometer.

Microphen has strong compensating effects, I've found. It tends to not blow out the highlights while not nec. being a low-contrast developer. I can get out to much higher speeds - 1600 (which is pushed with insufficient shadow detail, of course) - where the highlights are still controlled while still getting to acceptable midtones (the point of pushing, after all).

So Microphen (or DDX/F76+,. the liquid phenidone-based equivalents) will all give you more speed.

200 is quite slow. I hope you are getting very fine grain without too much loss of sharpness with your developer. 200 is what I rate TXT with Perceptol, and I already find the loss of sharpness unacceptable even with the benefit of fine grain. This is 1+1. I can get maybe, maybe 250 with 1+3, but then acutance and grain is higher. But in a nice way (more testing required).

allan
 
Allan,

Thanks again. Have you tried microphen at different dilutions?
I presume it is some kind of solvent developer. If you use
1+3 dilution the solvent effect may decrease (I may be wrong,
of course). Is that true?

I do not mind some grain (that's one of the reasons why
I like Tri-x) :)

Pau
 
Microphen is a solvent developer, technically. However, it combines relatively fine grain with good speed (phenidone developers in general tend to do this).

However, Ilford themselves (well, one of the pre-Harman reps) said that Microphen is _not_ well suited to diluation. You get minimal increase in sharpness but noticeable difference in tonality. I haven't even tried it after reading that. I always use Microphen at stock, but I reuse it at 10 rolls per liter. More economical that way.

allan
 
"1000 for the Professional"?

Do you mean TXP as compared to TXT?

Diafine is a whole different ballgame. :) That's the only one that is a real exception to my "2/3 of a stop" comment I made earlier. Diafine was developed _for_ TXT, which is why not _all_ films get 1.6+ stops legit speed increase that you see for TXT. Whereas Microphen will give you a consistent 1/3 to 2/3 speed increase, IMO. Perhaps a full stop.

allan
 
Jonathan,

however, I've read that you don't have any control with
diafine. With my developer, I can control easily highlights
- in some way, that's what I do when I push -. Is it possible
to do that with diafine?

Pau
 
You have _some_ control with Diafine based on exposure. But it's a lot less than with other developers. I think Tom_ (or is it _Tom?) has posted on this in the past. But you don't get the usual exposure<>development control that you do with other developers.

allan
 
I rate TriX at 400 and develop with D-76/20C fro 9:45 (as Kodak suggests).

For low-light I expose it at 800 and develop for 10:45 to 11:15.

willie
 
I shoot tri-x at 400,800,1250 and 1600 all in HC-110. 1:63 or 1:100


Btw, is that your bultaco (in the avatar)
 
I usually rate Tri-X at 320, 400, or 800 and process in D-76 at recommended times/temp.
 
colyn said:
I usually rate Tri-X at 320, 400, or 800 and process in D-76 at recommended times/temp.
Click to expand...

I know this topic is a bit outdates but I am experimenting Tri-x in D76 for 320 and 400 to see any differences. When you develop at 320 do you compensate, 10% I think ?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom