DDX vs HC110

[brennanphotoguy]

Ok, I've been just stand developing (because I'm lazy) all my Tri-X (1600 ISO) with a 1+100 ratio in Rodinal for the past year and before that I was letting a local lab do everything for me and they were using XTOL. I got the look I was going for, a lot of fine grain and a lot of contrast. But recently I've been noticing more situations where I want a smoother image with more tonal range. I want to keep using Tri-X and I was planning on shooting a test roll with bracketing at 200/320/400 to see which ISO worked best. There's a ton of stuff out there about HC110 but I was curious about DDX after I started reading about it but didn't see a whole lot of samples of it. I still want a fair amount of contrast but I want more in the midtones than I have been getting. I also want to stick with a one shot, liquid developer because NYC apartment living sucks.

Any info/advice?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

If you're pushing Tri-X to 1600, then DDX is a far better developer than HC-110. For normal speed, DDX should be fine. Its a very similar developer to Kodak's Tmax Developer, which I have used a lot for Tri-X.

If you get Tmax Developer instead of DDX, you can use my developing times for Tri-X using Tmax Developer at a 1+7 dilution, which cuts your costs to use it quite a bit over the standard 1+4 dilution.

http://crawfordphotoschool.com/film/developing.php?tab=2

 

[brennanphotoguy]

Cool, I'll look into that one as well. Thanks!