charjohncarter
Veteran
Sorry again, I was called away: 120 for these photos, I use it regularly with 35. And I discard after each use.
Developer That Goes Best With Tri-X
- Thread starter kyler.
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 48
- Views 29K
jawarden
Well-known
I'm not an expert at anything so take my comments as just another data point. I have used DDX, TMax and Xtol for the past year or so, and of those three I like Xtol and TMax, but have settled on Xtol.
These are Xtol (which I usually use at 1+1) for what it's worth. I generally shoot at 320 (developing at 400) or up to 1600 when needed.
Cheers,
Jeff
edit: The picture of the girl was taken with one of those BS lenses where you have to lean in while standing on one leg to focus. 🙂
These are Xtol (which I usually use at 1+1) for what it's worth. I generally shoot at 320 (developing at 400) or up to 1600 when needed.
Cheers,
Jeff
edit: The picture of the girl was taken with one of those BS lenses where you have to lean in while standing on one leg to focus. 🙂
Last edited:
Tim Gray
Well-known
One of the reasons I use XTOL over D76 is that I find it a lot easier to mix up. You don't have to heat it up to 125 F or whatever it is. It mixes at room temperature.
While Chris gives good advice and has great photos, it's important not to take anyone's advice too much when it comes to film ratings. For the pictures Chris likes and the way he prints, meters, etc., 320 might be perfect for Tri-X. That doesn't mean that you won't decide to shoot it at 200, 250, 320, 400, 800, etc. It's important to do your own tests and figure out what you like. You don't need a densitometer etc. Just take a roll of film and shoot the same scene over and over with many different exposures (1/2 stop differences, whatever works for you). Then try to print/scan them all. Figure out which one gives YOU the picture YOU like the most, and that might be right amount of exposure for that kind of scene... FOR YOU.
While Chris gives good advice and has great photos, it's important not to take anyone's advice too much when it comes to film ratings. For the pictures Chris likes and the way he prints, meters, etc., 320 might be perfect for Tri-X. That doesn't mean that you won't decide to shoot it at 200, 250, 320, 400, 800, etc. It's important to do your own tests and figure out what you like. You don't need a densitometer etc. Just take a roll of film and shoot the same scene over and over with many different exposures (1/2 stop differences, whatever works for you). Then try to print/scan them all. Figure out which one gives YOU the picture YOU like the most, and that might be right amount of exposure for that kind of scene... FOR YOU.
LeicaM3
Well-known
Thank you, will try and compare to my usual mix.
bigeye
Well-known
I don't think that there is a 'best' - you like a look or not. I may be hallucinating, but D76/Tri X looks like old TriX to me; XTOL takes TriX to a different place.
Is 'by-application' fair? Journalism (D76) vs. Portait (XTOL)
Starting out, I'd pick the look you like and leave the divided, mixes and stand solutions for later. The plain old developers will do all you want every time.
I started with D76 at school and like it very much, but I'm using XTOL now, I just like the look a bit better. Tones seem smoother to me with XTOL. (John's HC100 looks pretty good, too!). The kicker to me is the lesser stink and enviro impact of XTOL.
(I am intrigued by MFogiel's high-acutance pyros and I'm planing on experimenting with one. That's the "Zeiss" look - to me anyway. For the 6x6 and 4x5, I'm also planning on trying XTOL 1:3 with a dash of rodinal in semi-stand simply to use less stock. But, this is tweaking and not bread-and-butter developing.)
- Charlie
Is 'by-application' fair? Journalism (D76) vs. Portait (XTOL)
Starting out, I'd pick the look you like and leave the divided, mixes and stand solutions for later. The plain old developers will do all you want every time.
I started with D76 at school and like it very much, but I'm using XTOL now, I just like the look a bit better. Tones seem smoother to me with XTOL. (John's HC100 looks pretty good, too!). The kicker to me is the lesser stink and enviro impact of XTOL.
(I am intrigued by MFogiel's high-acutance pyros and I'm planing on experimenting with one. That's the "Zeiss" look - to me anyway. For the 6x6 and 4x5, I'm also planning on trying XTOL 1:3 with a dash of rodinal in semi-stand simply to use less stock. But, this is tweaking and not bread-and-butter developing.)
- Charlie
Monz
Monz
@thomasw: With XTol, I mix up the 5L all in one go; then decant into five 1L plastic bottles with screw top. I keep the bottles in the dark in a cardboard box. Using at 1+1 dilution means each bottle will give you four runs (250ml Xtol + 250ml H20 per run). I use the bottles sequentially. Using this system, I have been able to keep the XTol good for well over 6 months. The last run was as good as the first.
Patman
Established
Back when I was processing my own film I used to use D76 1 to 1 but when I wanted to push it past 400 I used to use Microdol, since no one has mentioned it I guess they no longer make it. It gave beautiful grain structure and great gray tones.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Well, Microdol is a "speed losing" developer when used full strength. You can dilute it 1:3 to reduce the sulfite concentration for pushing.
But I think it may indeed have been discontinued. D-76 full strength is a better push developer, however.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Let me know, I just did this with zero testing. I just felt that I liked the highlights better after doing it and also a little more midtone contrast. So I would like to hear what you think.
