Tri-X @ 100 ? ? ?

[dcsang]

I know most of you will say "you're stupid" to this but I'm really curious.

Have any of you ever shot Tri-X @ 100? (and dev'd @ 100)

Let me explain what I'm sort of looking for here.

In attempting to get a similar grain structure across ISO's (yes.. here's where you say "you're stupid Dave !!") i was hoping to use but ONE B&W film for weddings.

Tri-X, while awesome at 400, 800, maybe 1600, is a complete unknown to me below it's labeled rating.

Any one have any ideas regarding this?

Cheers,
Dave

 

[le vrai rdu]

I do trix from 200 to 3200 🙂

I plan to try at 100 (it should work) next week 🙂

 

[mfogiel]

Tri X at 100 or 200 will give you fabulous tonality. The only penalty could be slightly lower sharpness at EI 100. Remember to cut the dev time substantially. There is even a guy on you tube, who advocates shooting Tri X @ 100 and developing in Diafine. I got close to that shooting at f2.8 in daylight to get this kind of effect:

BTW, that was taken with C Sonnar - highly recommended for female shots... I had shot this roll on EI between 100 and 1600 - all came out usable.

 

[dcsang]

Oh my... perhaps I won't need to buy an ASA/ISO 100 film after all - that shot is immaculate.

I would want to use XTOL 1:1 though - don't know if I want to play with too many developers..

Cheers,
Dave

 

[newspaperguy]

I've used Tri-X @ 200 in HC110 for the past 20 years or so.

 

[Roger Hicks]

A fine-grain developer such as Perceptol gives you a true ISO of maybe 250 anyway, which together with a stop of overexposure should give excellent tonality too.

BUT: more exposure = coarser grain, so you'll lose much of the advantage of the FG dev, and sharpness will, as mfogiel points out, be worse. I really wouldn't stick with Xtol 1+1 for this application.

As a matter of interest, how much is a pair of shoes worth (given your signature)?

Cheers,

R.

 

[dcsang]

Dear Roger 🙂

I have a really funny story to go with that, which is clearly an aside from what I've asked 🙂

A bride to be, very early this year, booked me to shoot their nuptials.
The wedding was at the end of January. A dearth of effective daylight and, it was being held in the evening at a local establishment. Seeing as these folks were on a budget, I priced it out accordingly (i.e. I clearly undercut myself).

Lesson learned when I went to take some getting ready photos and realized the bride had spent almost as much as I had charged on just one pair of new shoes for her wedding. She had, also, a second pair of very expensive shoes.

That said, I didn't begrudge the fact that I shot the wedding because they were a nice couple and, in the end, everyone was happy.

However, as I said, I learned my lesson. 🙂

Cheers,
Dave

P.S. The shoes?? oh.. they were these http://www.neimanmarcus.com/store/catalog/prod.jhtml?itemId=prod64820067&parentId= along with a pair of equally pricey Guccis....

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I use Tri-X at 100 20 years ago.

For soft light I use it at 200 with normal development.

And for direct sun at 100, with yellow filter and short development for rich, clean shadows.

In both cases this "enough light exposure" produces superb tone for wet printing and similar negative contrast...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[dcsang]

Thanks for the input so far folks - I'm willing to give it a try @ 200 - that may be better anyway.. or, as Juan has suggested, to use a yellow filter @ 100.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[sepiareverb]

I'll vote for Perceptol as well. I pull HP5+ to 50 with Perceptol- that's the max I can get to- but 100 with Tri-X should be cake.

 

[le vrai rdu]

so it works well 🙂

any time with D76 ? 🙂

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Thanks for the input so far folks - I'm willing to give it a try @ 200 - that may be better anyway.. or, as Juan has suggested, to use a yellow filter @ 100.

Cheers,
Dave

With camera TTL metering and filter I use 100. For incident metering and filter I use 50: below the 200 I use for normal light, in harsh light one stop less for the filter and another one for the shadows / short development.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[tj01]

Tri-X with D76 1+1 5.30 minutes. But didn't like it because it looked flat. But if you have a contrasty scene , might look printable .
Goodluck

 

[Freakscene]

Xtol will work fine for Tri-X @ Ei 100, but I'd suggest using it 1+3 or even more dilute (but remember Kodak's caveats about needing 100 mL of developer per roll). Kodak's old data sheets before they gave up recommending higher dilutions than 1+1 have times for "EI 100/200". I can send you the .pdf if you pm me your email address.

I'm currently experimenting with developing 2 rolls of 135 Tri-X in a litre of Xtol 1+4, but at higher EIs.

Marty

 

[le vrai rdu]

great 🙂

thanks 🙂

 

[charjohncarter]

I've used Tri-X @ 200 in HC110 for the past 20 years or so.

So do I, but not for 20 years. The OP should try it. I works great when you get everything down, lots of shadows and no blow outs:

Well, no major blow outs.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Beautiful tone indeed...

I can imagine how that shot would look if shot and developed at 400... It would have a wild contrast, and the fruits and the whole living room wouldn't show its real life feeling: a visible place... And that negative, with filters 3 and 4 can produce powerful, contrasty prints... Very well done... Not flat in any way.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[charjohncarter]

Beautiful tone indeed...

I can imagine how that shot would look if shot and developed at 400... It would have a wild contrast, and the fruits and the whole living room wouldn't show its real life feeling: a visible place... And that negative, with filters 3 and 4 can produce powerful, contrasty prints... Very well done... Not flat in any way.

Cheers,

Juan

Thanks Juan, I was shooting this photo when I was using your Sun/Shade method. Maybe I ought to go back to it.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Your contrast control is a delight every time!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[dfoo]

Thanks Juan, I was shooting this photo when I was using your Sun/Shade method. Maybe I ought to go back to it.

What is the sun/shade method?