Time for Tri-X

Jarle Aasland

Jarle Aasland

Nikon SP/S2, Fuji X100
Local time
1:20 AM
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
164
It's been a while, but I'm finally ready for shooting some good old Tri-X again!

211422661-M.jpg


I'll leave the D2X at home and only bring my beautiful S2. I'm inspired and ready to go!

Jarle

PS: What do you use for developing Tri-X? Like I said, it's been a while..
 
You will get lots of opinions on developer choices for Tri-X. D76 or ID11 @ 1:1 dilution are always good choices, HC-110 (Dilution B or Dilution H) are fine, and then there's Rodinal. I'm currently using Rodinal 1:100 with a pretty gentle agitation scheme. Rodinal is very sensitive to agitation; in general less is more.
 
I seem to be choosing Ilford developers, so I'd use ID11 (kodak equivalent would be D76) or Microphen (speed increasing developer) for powdered developers, or DDX for a liquid-concentrate.

I tried HC110 (Kodak) once via a friend, but it seemed a bit too sharp in contrast, although lots of people love this so I might have been using the wrong dilution ?

The DDX isn't as expensive as some people seem to think because the 1 Ltr bottle is bigger than the usual sizes (1/4 or 1/2 Ltr) for other liquid developers and makes at least five litres of dev. Being less "perfect" about it, you can also reuse the stock solution if you make up a litre and increase the dev-time per batch of film (never tried this with DDX but the same idea works ok with ID11 for non-critical developing).
 
As Martin and Trius have already said.

D-76 1:1 (or ID-11, although I've never tried it) for normal speed.

And, of course, Diafine for ISO 1600.

I really liked these two combinations when I was using Tri-X.

However, I've settled on HP5+ because it's cheaper here in the UK.
 
Jarle Aasland said:
PS: What do you use for developing Tri-X? Like I said, it's been a while..
Click to expand...

I just developed some Tri-X rolls with D-76 at 1:1, 20C, 10 3/4 min in small tank.
Here are some examples. Sorry, not with Nikon RF, but I hope you don't mind. :)





 
And Tri-X with Rodinal 1+50 is not bad at all, or what you think? ;)
Shot with "evil SLR" Nikon F4 + Nikkor AI-S 105/2.5 at wide open.





 
@jsuominen,
your photos are quite good,
yeah wolud say perfect (even when shot with a nikon)

If you'r able take one time a Leica M with a Leica lense and you will send your nikon back to japan :)

how do yo set up your D76?
one envelope is for 3.8 liter dilution,
that's quite a lot off stuff :-(

and at wich level do you switcj your lightmeter in the camera?
 
martin-f5 said:
@jsuominen,
your photos are quite good,
yeah wolud say perfect (even when shot with a nikon)

If you'r able take one time a Leica M with a Leica lense and you will send your nikon back to japan :)

how do yo set up your D76?
one envelope is for 3.8 liter dilution,
that's quite a lot off stuff :-(

and at wich level do you switcj your lightmeter in the camera?
Click to expand...

Thank you, Martin. I have shot Tri-X also with my M2 and those photos are here :):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/117242131/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/117242323/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/117242266/

About D-76. It came actually in 5 liter tin can, so mixing that stuff took quite many dark glass bottles! You asked about the exposure meter. I tried to use Rollei 35RF own meter (set at 400ASA) in this shot http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/1685183492/ . It was also a lucky shot, because I wasn't sure, if I can hold my camera steady and was there enough light for shot. For the other shots, I used also Gossen Digisix incident exposure meter.
 
Jarle, you cant go wrong with D-76. Thousand's of pressphotographers and photojournalists have used this combination for decades.
D76 1:1 and TriX @400 for 10-11 minutes at 20C is pretty bulletproof as combinations go.
I suspect that you can still go just about anywhere in the world and even if you dont speak the language "D76 and TX" is pretty well universal.
It might not give you the finest grain, but it certainly will allow you to pull 16x20's from a small negative!
I play around with a lot of developer combinations and films for fun, but when I know I have to get it right the first time, that is the combination that I use.
The Flickr sites tagged Tri X will give you good ideas what to expect. Great resource for us bl/w shooters too.
 
you also can use Calbe A49 (or Adox A49),
I think it's equal to D-76.

But it's easier to set up,
you get two parts which results in 1 l solution.
Then you develop in 1+2 parts solution / water.

A49 is also usefull for other films, Fomapan 100, Agfa APX 100 and much more.
Negaitvs are fine grainy, have great tonalrange and are real sharp.
 
f2eyelevel said:
D76 1:1 for 12' at 20C with continuous shaking during the 1st minute, then 5-6 shakings (upside-down + rotational movements with your wrist) each minute and continuous shaking during the last minute will give you perfect results with Tri-X.
Click to expand...

Times are dependent water source and type of enlarger (condenser vs. cold light, etc.) There is no magic bullet, one should always test to arrive at what one judges to be "best". I prefer EI of 250 or 320; sorry but that's what my testing has proven FOR ME.
 
You seem to be very confused about what I said about EI. EI and ISO are not the same. EI is the exposure index that a photographer will use for a particular film under particular circumstances. It may agree with the published ISO rating ... or not. There are many books by authors from Adams to Picker to (Phil) Davis which discuss and explain this. I said that TX (by which I meant Tri-X 400 in 35mm) works best for me @ an EI of 250 or maybe 350, depending on circumstances, the meter used etc. (Yes, not all my meters are calibrated to each other.

And While water quality may not make a huge difference in development times, it can be an issue, hence developing times are dependent on water composition. Not only is this my personal experience resulting in moving from one locale to another, others have this same experience, i.e. see http://www.mironchuk.com/HC-110.html

Enlarger illumination is not irrelevant, I have seen it with my own eyes in my own professional work. Even if there is no enlarger involved, i.e., negatives will be scanned rather than optically printed, exposure and d-max achieved by developer and development time make a difference. It's a matter of physics. I for one don't just look at negatives ... I make prints or files for computer display. I don't recall Jarle asking for a "perfect negative for direct viewing only".

All I was saying to Jarle was that he will have to fine tune his methods based on testing or trial and error ... trial and error being a form of unstructured testing.

Oh, and by the way, I do know about the various Tri-X SKUs. I have been shooting Tri-X since about 1973 and have been through various iterations. In addition, I live in Rochester and some of the folks on the professional film products support line greet me by name when they see my caller ID.

I am more than certain that you produce great Tri-X negatives and the processing regimen you use works for you. I'm glad for that.

f2eyelevel said:
Times are for no means dependent of water source given that you process at 20C and even less of the type of enlarger (said with all respect to you, it's just plain irrelevant, the target here is how the negative will look, not what the printed picture will look once the negative has been put in the enlarger tray).

Jarle has asked for some advice to get some kind of universal developing basis and method, this is what I provided him, just because I have developed more Tri-X using the method I've described above and which I've got stuck with than you ever can do with your testing and testing and testing. I always got perfect negs, thanks to something that I haven't called the "magic bullet", but which is what all the great "developers" all around have said they've used forever, and which they wouldn't get away of.

As for the EI, well, there are now two Tri-X on the market actually, one called TX to be exposed at ISO 400 and the other one called TXP to be exposed at ISO 320, I think I had to mention this since your last sentence might have got Jarle confused a little bit more.

http://wwwfr.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw/triX2.jhtml?id=0.2.26.14.17.20&lc=en
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for all your suggestions. I had decided to play it safe and go with D-76, but since it wasn't available at my local dealer (not too many shops selling b/w developer these days), I decided to try Rodinal instead. I don't mind some grain.

How does 1:50, 20C, 10.5 - 11 mins. sound? How much agitation?

Thanks,
Jarle
 
Jarle Aasland said:
Thanks for all your suggestions. I had decided to play it safe and go with D-76, but since it wasn't available at my local dealer (not too many shops selling b/w developer these days), I decided to try Rodinal instead. I don't mind some grain.

How does 1:50, 20C, 10.5 - 11 mins. sound? How much agitation?

Thanks,
Jarle
Click to expand...

Well, I use 1:50 20°C and 14 minutes. Agitation: First 30s then 4 times every minute. This seems to be 2 min shorter than what the datasheet for Rodinal says, but is fine for me, although quite grainy (which I like).
 
Jarle Aasland said:
How does 1:50, 20C, 10.5 - 11 mins. sound? How much agitation?

Jarle
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty close to me, maybe little under, I use 12½, 20 C, agitation continuous for the first minute then 5 secs in every 30 sec.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but Rodinal is very sensitive to agitation. Less is more. The time sounds a little short, but I haven't used 1:50 for a long time, so really can't say. Times are somewhat individual on individual factors such as how you meter, quality of water, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom