Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I don't have any scans of my Tri-X rolls rated at 1600 developed in Diafine. It is really one of the best ways to go if you're going to use this film at this speed. Why punish it by pushing?? I very much dislike pushing unless what I'm going for is getting the grain and loss of resolution.
I must say though, that Neil's samples are absolutely fine. But 33 minutes! That's dedication.
Since rating at 1600 is usually for low-light situations, the conditions are usually ripe for high-contrast situations; this is where Diafine shines. For flat lighting conditions, developing in Diafine is very disappointing (muted highlights), but the beauty is that you can rate different frames in the same roll at different speeds depending on the conditions (do at own risk, though...expensive learning curve).
I'm lucky enough to live where a camera dealer stocks Diafine at very reasonable prices ($12 ea.); I've bought three extra kits, just in case.
I've heard of people rating T-Max 400 at 800 and even at 1200 too for developing in Diafine with pleasing results; I've never done it, for I'm not a big fan of T-Max; I have read somewhere that a soup of Xtol and Rodinal 1+50 (yes, you read right) can be used to push TMY to 1200 too with pleasing grain. I'm tempted to do that sometime in the near future.
Now, regarding scanning negatives developed in Rodinal, I have developed both 120 and 35mm TMY in Rodinal 1+50 (about 13 minutes @ 68 F ... I haven't done it in almost a year, I'm out of practice but will very soon) with excellent results, very smooth and sharp. Haven't had the courage to try it with HP5+, though; D76 stock for that only.
I must say though, that Neil's samples are absolutely fine. But 33 minutes! That's dedication.
Since rating at 1600 is usually for low-light situations, the conditions are usually ripe for high-contrast situations; this is where Diafine shines. For flat lighting conditions, developing in Diafine is very disappointing (muted highlights), but the beauty is that you can rate different frames in the same roll at different speeds depending on the conditions (do at own risk, though...expensive learning curve).
I'm lucky enough to live where a camera dealer stocks Diafine at very reasonable prices ($12 ea.); I've bought three extra kits, just in case.
I've heard of people rating T-Max 400 at 800 and even at 1200 too for developing in Diafine with pleasing results; I've never done it, for I'm not a big fan of T-Max; I have read somewhere that a soup of Xtol and Rodinal 1+50 (yes, you read right) can be used to push TMY to 1200 too with pleasing grain. I'm tempted to do that sometime in the near future.
Now, regarding scanning negatives developed in Rodinal, I have developed both 120 and 35mm TMY in Rodinal 1+50 (about 13 minutes @ 68 F ... I haven't done it in almost a year, I'm out of practice but will very soon) with excellent results, very smooth and sharp. Haven't had the courage to try it with HP5+, though; D76 stock for that only.
Last edited:
neilsphoto
Established
Yes, Rodinal 1:50 for 33 minutes. Just window light. 125th @F2? , maybe 2.8 with an 85 on a Canon EOS 1n RS.
O
o0dano0o
Guest
diafine + trix @ 1600 = tasty
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Gene,
I managed to try an experiment with Tri-X pushed to 1600 and processed in D76 1:4 for 30 mins. Not too bad. I think at this dilution there is a loss of acutance. The images just don't seem as sharp.
I agitated every 5 mins for about 5 seconds (a few slow inversions), and souped the roll in a liter of solution. These shots are of my kids lazin' in front of the TV <yawn>.
I have a few outdoor shots in deep shade, but these shots may be closer to a scenario where someone would want to push to 1600. BTW, these are straight, no contrast or brightness adjustments, only cropped slightly, and spotted in PS.
Anyway, check them out below.
I managed to try an experiment with Tri-X pushed to 1600 and processed in D76 1:4 for 30 mins. Not too bad. I think at this dilution there is a loss of acutance. The images just don't seem as sharp.
I agitated every 5 mins for about 5 seconds (a few slow inversions), and souped the roll in a liter of solution. These shots are of my kids lazin' in front of the TV <yawn>.
I have a few outdoor shots in deep shade, but these shots may be closer to a scenario where someone would want to push to 1600. BTW, these are straight, no contrast or brightness adjustments, only cropped slightly, and spotted in PS. Anyway, check them out below.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
quite nice shots, Ray. What was the reason you pushed the film? Seems there was quite some light in there...
Tri X at 1600 in Diafine
Shot with Canon 50/1.5
Shot with Canon 50/1.5
Last edited:
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i like these, rover
Funny - now that i look second time at the thumbnail of the last shot, it looks like a big swastikka in a circle, on the blackboard!!! Scary. Sorry for OT remark.
Funny - now that i look second time at the thumbnail of the last shot, it looks like a big swastikka in a circle, on the blackboard!!! Scary. Sorry for OT remark.
R
Roman
Guest
I also saw the swastika and was wondering about the story behind the image before I opened th picture...
Roman
Roman
The S in the Sam?
By chance there was another boy named Sam also at the board, you can see where he wrote his name behind my Sam.
By chance there was another boy named Sam also at the board, you can see where he wrote his name behind my Sam.
The S is only the left half of the "swastika"...
back alley
IMAGES
rover,
i really like that second shot!
it's easy to see how much time you spend with your son as you seem to often catch that 'little boy' moment so well.
i also like the look of the 1.5
joe
i really like that second shot!
it's easy to see how much time you spend with your son as you seem to often catch that 'little boy' moment so well.
i also like the look of the 1.5
joe
Thank you Joe. If my shots say that photography is my other passion, then I will always be a happy man.
I put the Canon 50/1.5 on my M3 this morning after scanning these shots. This was a harshly lit day, bright sun, but when I didn't abuse it by shooting into backlit situations where any image would suffer, the 50/1.5 shined. I shot with my square 50/1.9 hood and a yellow filter.
I put the Canon 50/1.5 on my M3 this morning after scanning these shots. This was a harshly lit day, bright sun, but when I didn't abuse it by shooting into backlit situations where any image would suffer, the 50/1.5 shined. I shot with my square 50/1.9 hood and a yellow filter.
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Pherdinand said:
Hi Pherdinand, actually it was late in the day and my shutter speeds, while still usable, were getting kinda slow. That's the light of a setting sun through a western facing window. The main reason why I pushed was to try out D76 at higher dilutions and stand-type times (as discussed earlier in the thread). I probably could have gotten by with pushing to 800, or 1250, but that wasn't the point of the test.
I think these look nice as well, but I don't know if I'd go this route—maybe with more testing.
Last edited:
Justin Low
J for Justin
My apologies for bringing such a buried thread back to the top, but I tried the suggestion to developed Tri-X that has been exposed at EI3200 for 30 minutes in Rodinal.
It works well! I developed it for 15 minutes at 30°C and the density looks really good. Unfortunately, the negatives have a pretty dense base fog. They scan decently, with reasonable contrast and grain.
It works well! I developed it for 15 minutes at 30°C and the density looks really good. Unfortunately, the negatives have a pretty dense base fog. They scan decently, with reasonable contrast and grain.