Diafine ???

cosmonaut

cosmonaut

Well-known
Local time
12:19 PM
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
1,212
I just developed a roll of TrX that I shot at 1200iso. They seem to be fine but have yet to scan. I still have half a roll in camera. Can I shoot half the roll at 1200 and the other half at 400 and it still develope ok, seems somewhere I read I could do that...
 
Within a single roll of film, you need to shoot at a single film speed. The development times would be different for a roll shot at iso 1200 and one at the box speed, and you can only develop for one period of time. You'd need to choose between proper development on one half of the roll or another.

Atleast to my knowledge. Someone enlighten me if I am mistaken.
 
I've heard of people shooting Tri-x @ 400 and developing in Diafine when shooting in lower contrast light, so it could work. Try it and see what happens.
 
I've done that with Neopan 400 and Diafine. I am constantly shooting at different ISOs on the same roll of film as necessary. Diafine seems to do a great job with it. I say go for it!
 
I developed the roll and it seems to be fine. I shot at 1200 all the same speed and then three mins. in A,three mins in B, rinsed, fixed and washed. They look good. I could play around at 800 and see. I have a small concert I want to shoot in Feb. I have shot there before and it is dim. I couldn't see to set my lens. Thanks for all the help. If you have any sample photos and the ISO you shot at it would help.
 
I find that Diafine gives great results with Tri-x anywhere from EI400 to 1600 (and even above this if shot in generous light). My strategy when using TX and Diafine is to simply expose every frame as I wish. Of course, different EIs may look slightly different, so you should test to get a feel for it, but it is very hard to get an unusable image with this combination.
 
Wcarpenter said:
Within a single roll of film, you need to shoot at a single film speed. The development times would be different for a roll shot at iso 1200 and one at the box speed, and you can only develop for one period of time. You'd need to choose between proper development on one half of the roll or another.

Atleast to my knowledge. Someone enlighten me if I am mistaken.
Click to expand...

This is for single bath (non compensating developers), you process film in diafine the same no matter what EI it has been exposed at. Three or more minutes in each bath and you are home free.
 
Diafine develops to quite low contrast. It is possible to get good results from overexposed images i.e. tri-x at 400 will work too. There's only one way to develop with diafine and indeed 1200-1600 seems to be ideal tri-x speed for that, but due to the low contrast even 400 will give ok results.
Depends on the lighting conditions as well that were present at exposure.
 
I have never tried Diafine, but all the comments about it do make it tempting.

So - what kind of results does it deliver compared to "common" developers (X-tol, ID11, rodinal). How are the tones? How is the grain shape/size?
 
Here is one I used in Diafine. The cool thing about it is it can be used over and over again. Also very low grain. Nokton 40mm SC.

heavy_metal_web2-1.jpg
 
Diafine devotees sometimes portray it as a Holy Grail, a Silver Bullet, a developer that can Do It All. Fairly clearly, though, if it were as infinitely superior as its devotees maintain, it would by now have replaced all other developers.

In my experience, twin-bath devs work less well with modern films than with older ones, and it ain't just emulsion thickness: it's also hardening and development accelerators.

In other words, yes, you should get perfectly usable negs at both speeds. Whether they're the best negs you could possibly get, at the optimum speed in the optimum developer, is another matter.

Cheers,

R.
 
I have shot Tri X in Diafine on the same roll between EI 100 and 3200, and all shots were usable, however for me the best results come out around EI 400-800. I was normally rating it at EI 1000. The only problem I have never been able to overcome with Diafine, is the streaking on film, no matter what tank you use and how you agitate, this is why I prefer to avoid it unless I have no other choice.
 
I found the sweet spot for myself was EI 640 in daylight with Tri-x, and only once had any sort of streaking out of 20-30 rolls.
 
I just got some Diafine to try, but I've not had a chance to mix it up yet. Wanted to see what Neopan 1600 and Pan F + would be like in it. If it is as contrasty as the above example I'll be dumping it.
 
Well I just scanned some negs shot at 1250. That may have been a little high and yes they were less contraty than the example here. I think I am going to try a little slower ISO maybe more around 1000 or 800.
 
It works well at 1250/1600 and I have gotten useable results at 400 (all TriX 35). The results can be very dependent on metering - I had problems when I metered the highlights; I should have let the developer take care of them. Grainer than Xtol, but a lot quicker.
 
sepiareverb said:
I just got some Diafine to try, but I've not had a chance to mix it up yet. Wanted to see what Neopan 1600 and Pan F + would be like in it. If it is as contrasty as the above example I'll be dumping it.
Click to expand...

I shot Pan F at 80 ISO with a Noct-Nikkor (a contrasty lens). The negatives produced with Diafine were low contrast. I exposed the film in mixed lighting (early morning and late afternoon) as an experiment. Probably not the best negatives for wet printing (kinda thin). Next time I will shoot near noon. Seems to love harsh-harsh lighting, especially urban landscape at night with bright lights and darkness. The more exaggerated the better.

I found the best results shooting Fuji Arcos at 160 at night with bright lights (5 minutes Part A and 5 minutes Part B) where the contrast compression is like a miracle. AMAZING NEGATIVES!!! The results were fine grain and moderate contrast. Very detailed with mucho mid tones. Works great in 120 with a Rolleiflex.

BTW I use ID-11, 1+1 with mostly Tri-X, TXP-320, HP5, and Pan F.

Cal
 
Carlos M said:
Did anybody really say that?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

A magazine feature from 1961 or 62 (the magazine's name escapes me now, but I have a copy in my collection) which announced the arrival of Diafine was saying just that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom