ZoneIII
Newbie
I realize this is an old thread but I just can't resist.
Morca: That's a neat trick getting color pictures from Tri-X developed in Diafine!
Also, I have to vent on a pet peeve of mine. That is, the incorrect usage of the terms "over-expose" and " under-expose". If you change the E.I. and get the results you want, it is not under or over-exposure. Those terms describe an error. Strictly speaking, you never under or over-expose film unless you intentionally want to get results that you don't want! (if that makes any sense.)
Also, if you getting good shadow detail, you are not pushing the film. Pushing is not the same as rating film at an E.I. that gives you the highest quallity results. Pushing involves raitng the film faster so you can use higher shutter speeds to get a shot you otherwise couldn't get but with the understanding that the cost is that quality is lower. If you rate Tri-X at 800, 1200, or 1600, you are not pushing the film if you are getting good shadow detail and overall results. You are simply rating the film faster.
Morca: That's a neat trick getting color pictures from Tri-X developed in Diafine!
Also, I have to vent on a pet peeve of mine. That is, the incorrect usage of the terms "over-expose" and " under-expose". If you change the E.I. and get the results you want, it is not under or over-exposure. Those terms describe an error. Strictly speaking, you never under or over-expose film unless you intentionally want to get results that you don't want! (if that makes any sense.)
Also, if you getting good shadow detail, you are not pushing the film. Pushing is not the same as rating film at an E.I. that gives you the highest quallity results. Pushing involves raitng the film faster so you can use higher shutter speeds to get a shot you otherwise couldn't get but with the understanding that the cost is that quality is lower. If you rate Tri-X at 800, 1200, or 1600, you are not pushing the film if you are getting good shadow detail and overall results. You are simply rating the film faster.
andredossantos
Well-known
I really love Diafine and Ive tried it with almost all the readily available "classic" films. IMO, the only Delta/Tmax film ive gotten decent results with is Delta 3200 believe it or not. Agree that it Makes negs that scan very nicely. I also keep DDX and Xtol around so no, it's not for all situations. As others have said you must be careful exposing the film and agitate it VERY gentle (2 or 3 inversions per min).
It's not perfect for all situations obviously but it is NOT a mediocre developer. You simply have to know how and when to use it.
It's not perfect for all situations obviously but it is NOT a mediocre developer. You simply have to know how and when to use it.
wintoid
Back to film
I do not, and have never understood how Diafine can produce negs of a similar density from (say) TriX at EI 400 and TriX at EI 1600 on the same roll. Perhaps someone could explain that?
sniki
Well-known
If you shot a low contrast scene at EI 400 and a quite contrast one at EI 1600, upon souping in Diafine you'll get a very similar density on the same roll; a (good) reason - when shooting for Diafine - to consider this "lever action" in the contrast-density feedback loop.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Diafine isn't perfect. It is if its results are exactly what you're looking for, of course.
I've used it for film that's expired: expired film won't be as "sharp" or "fine" anymore, and I find Diafine great for those contrasty very-sunny or very-contrasty-indoors shots.
Yes, Tri-X seems less grainy if you expose it at ISO 800 rather than ISO 1000 (which is what I often do when I have Diafine already in mind)
I've used it for film that's expired: expired film won't be as "sharp" or "fine" anymore, and I find Diafine great for those contrasty very-sunny or very-contrasty-indoors shots.
Yes, Tri-X seems less grainy if you expose it at ISO 800 rather than ISO 1000 (which is what I often do when I have Diafine already in mind)