My Diafine and Tri-X aren't getting along. ???

S

schmoozit

Schmoozit good...
Local time
6:29 AM
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
210
I'm havin' a heck of a time with Tri-X in Diafine. Every time I do it I get a streaking of some sort running vertically across one edge of the negs. I cannot figure out what it is. And get this: It only happens with Tri-X!!! Not that I've done a variety of other films, but some Neopan 400 came out perfectly clean, and with the same processing technique, camera, lens... What gives?

I couldn't scan all the way to the edges of the neg, but so you know, the dark streaks that are coming down are between the sprocket holes. I've never seen this on films done with TMax Dev, until now the only other developer I've used.

I thought this may be a product of too vigorous agitation, but my latest roll was done with zero agitation, and the same effect. :-(

I'd also say that for some reason my negs seem to come out a bit over-developed. Judging from the edges, the film seems darker than it should be. I've generally exposed at 1600 for the Diafine (varied throughout the roll), but that shouldn't effect the edges. I'm thinking that this may be a natural effect of how the Diafine works, however. I honestly haven't compared to Tri-X souped in the TMax Dev yet, however.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... *zero* agitation in Bath B? And streaks *between* the sprocket holes... I wonder if this could be the fabled "bromide drag" effect?
 
I'll Google "bromide drag" in a second. I just ran another batch of Neopan to confirm that it wasn't a fluke before; sadly, it's not. It only shows on the Tri-X.
 
Hmmm! Maybe it's under-agitation. I think what I thought it was, it wasn't. There is something called "surge" that will cause weird effects from dev rushing through sprocket holes, but now after reading some, I think it probably is bromide drag.

I'll go and do another roll of Tri-X tonight with a better agitation routine and see how it goes. The thing that sorta gets me is that I've heard of several people who say they don't agitate in Diafine and everything's cool.
 
Last edited:
I'm one of the non-agitaters, and I've been fine with it, but keep in mind I don't have large expanses of sky in my shots either. Sky = light = more development in those areas = more possiblilty of bromide drag.
 
Exactly; it's only visible on certain shots. And for the Neopan that didn't display the effect... well, I was wrong! It's definitely there.

I just ran another roll of Tri-X, but the negs are pretty overexposed (I thought Diafine could handle it down to 400), so it's kinda hard to tell right now. The edges look better, but certainly not as clean as I'd hoped. I'm waiting for them to dry a little more before I sleeve them and throw 'em on the light table.
 
I vote for under aggitation too. I give a gentle 5 seconds of aggitation about 2 minutes into both solutions A and B and then a bump when I use Diafine. I have had the drag too, when I have not followed this aggitation method.
 
The batch I did just now according to the instructions gave me better results. I could find no evidence of the effect. Unfortunately, developing Tri-X @ 400 in Diafine didn't give me negs that will scan and be useful. They are now in the trash :-(

Thanks for the tips and all, everyone.

BTW, I have a question: What would the effects of non-gentle agitation be in Diafine? We all know the box says to agitate "very gently", but why?
 
Last edited:
The first Diafine batch is the developing solution. When in this, the film does not develop, it simply absorbs the solution. The second bath is the developing agent. As the chemicals react with each other the film is developed. Unlike single bath developers where the two components are mixed together and therefore there is a lot of both agents present, in a two bath process the development is a local process. If you over agitate during the second bath you risk washing the developing solution away from the film and therefore stopping development, or more likely causing uneven development.

Does that make sense?
 
Just as another data point. I don't agitate at all in bath A except for a tap to dislodge any air bubbles after filling the tank. For B, I give one inversion when filled, one or two at 1:30, and one right before emptying. That has given me the most consistant results; YMMV.

William
 
OK, so which one is it, underagitation or overagitation? I believe I agitate quite a bit, although gently, and still get a faint bromide drag effect on a few frames, not only with Tri-X, but also with T-Max 400.
 
Bath A... it really doesn't matter, since no development takes place here. At the very least, dislodge the bubbles, but all you're doing here is letting the emulsion absorb.

Bath B is where it gets tricky. I don't agitate at all and haven't experienced bromide drag, but that may be more a function of of the scenes that I take and not over-exposing. Many recommend at least one inversion, but over-agitation will definitely lead to under-development or low contrast.

ps. I found one frame where I can see bromide drag. Again, it has a large expanse of light colour (dark area on the neg) near the edge of the negative. 99% of my Tri-X + Diafine shots are indoors with not much "bright areas".
 
Overagitation was my problem with Diafine years ago, but NO agitation in bath B seems a bit extreme. Very gentle movement every 45 sec or so seems to work well for me, just enough to get the least amount of fluid movement over the surface of the film to let the accumulated development byproducts drift away. Development is essentially complete in 3 minutes, so this only means 4-5 gentle nudges of the tank during the active period, though I actually continue on out to 5 minutes just to be sure it's done to completion. I have not identified any bromide drag.
 
The good news for me is that if I do experience bromide drag on my film, there is a strong probability that it will be on a crappy image. It is only you good photographers who have to worry. :D

Hey, we are firmly establishing that we have no idea of how to use Diafine at all....or....that Diafine really is the universal developer. We have tried everything and besides a couple hiccups, it works well for us.
 
Now I'm bummed. I'd planned to do a test tonight with correctly exposed (for Diafine) negs, but it turns out I won't be able to. The roll in the camera is half finished, and at the wrong speed. I won't be able to get my hands on more Tri-X for a little while either.
 
No problem. Shoot the rest of the roll at the speed you wanted. Diafine will process the same irregardless. Just make yourself a note as to which frame you changed speed on and go for it. That will give you something interesting to compare one the same roll.

That's one of the advantages of Diafine - being able to mix and match EI's on a single roll.

William
 
I develop in two different tanks, one plastic, one metal.


What I have to do in Diafine for development sans streamsers:

Plastic tank:
Fill with A, agitate for 30 seconds.
Every thirty seconds, invert 4 times.
After 3:15, dump, fill with B.
4 inversions ever 30 seconds.
Dump, do not rinse, fix, then rinse.

Metal tank:
Fill with A, agitate for 30 seconds.
Every thirty seconds, invert 2 times.
After 3:15, dump, fill with B.
2 inversions ever 30 seconds.
Dump, do not rinse, fix, then rinse.

Works great for me.
 
I have had similar problem with "lines" crossing the film between the sprocketholes.
After days of testing I discovered that the amount of developer/fixer was not enough, and some part of the film (we're talking millimeters) was not covered by the developer/fixer.

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