Tri-X question

A

Adam14

Established
Local time
11:31 AM
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
88
View My Gallery
Previously on the forum,it was highly recommended to me (new to film rangefinders) that I use Tri-x. So far I have been using Ilford XP-2.I just received some Tri-X 400 and about to use it(M6 and Bessa 3A). I would appreciate any advice on how to use this film. I am still a little confused about setting the different speeds on the camera and how it affects the exposure. Also why is this film so well liked?
Thanks,
Adam
 
I have used Tri-X for years. It's a very forgiving film when it comes to exposure and has a nice, tight grain structure. I shoot two to four rolls a week, mostly at ISO 400, but do shoot it at 800 and 1600. I don't know how well it works if you have a commercial lab develop it, but doing your own developing it works well with D76, Xtol, HC 110, and D23 divided as per Anchell. The D23 divided keeps the highlights from blowing out without losing shadow detail and works well with scanning and traditional printing.
 
Thanks very much for your replies! I do not do my own developing,I take it in to a commercial place. Do I have to tell them if I have shot this 400 film at say 800?
Adam
 
Works great in diafine too. Diafine is absurdly easy to develop with on your own. You cannot mess it up.


Yes, you need to tell a commercial lab what ISO you exposed your film for.
 
Adam14 said:
Thanks very much for your replies! I do not do my own developing,I take it in to a commercial place. Do I have to tell them if I have shot this 400 film at say 800?
Adam
Click to expand...

If you shot it at 800 I doubt it'd do a lot of good telling the lab. If they're pro's, they'll extra charge you for pushing the film. If you have even a closet to work in, you're going to be better off getting a Patterson tank and some chemicals and doing it yourself. If not, why not stick to C-41? It'll do the same job for you, and, if you scan your own film, you can use ICE on the C-41 negatives to get rid of dust and scratches - something silver based films cannot use.

Back in the 70s and 80s I used and loved Tri X and D-76. Would I go back to that today? Maybe -- if I ever retire and have time on my hands.... otherwise, C-41 is just fine for me.
 
Adam,

It is a very classic film and that is a nice match to classic cameras. However if you do not do your own development it can be rather expensive and slow to have it processed. If you like what XP-2 gives you I would stick with that. More shops/supermarkets where you can have XP-2 processed than Tri-x; it usually also is cheaper. If however you like the results that Tri-x (developed by a lab) gives you then the next step is to try developing your own. It is a lot of fun, not very expensive and everybody here is more than willing to share their knowledge with newcomers. We want to keep b+W film alive.

For the time being I would shoot Tri-x at 400. Set you cameras at 400 ISO and then meter as usual. Keep things simple for starters; after that there is a world to explore of different developers/dilutions/temperatures, pushing and pulling film etc etc.

Most important: have fun!
 
Shoot a few rolls at 400 in different light, high contrast, low light, etc. and see what the results look like before worrying too much about film speed. If you don't develop it yourself then your at the mercy of the lab.

I typically shoot it at 400 and liike the results, used to shoot it at 200 but my taste changed.

Todd
 
Adam, I echo what Peter said above. If you do not develop film yourself (however, it's fun, productive, has low toxicity and does NOT require a darkroom) then it is better to shoot something that you can get easily processed. For black and white that means one of the chromogenic films: Ilford's XP-2 plus and Kodak's BW400CN.

However, if you do want to use trix, most places that do film can send it out for you. The problem is that the development has a huge influence on the appearance of the negative (and resulting prints.) By sending it out, you will get a generic development, which negates most of the advantage of using a silver grain film like trix (or any other B&W film except the 2 mentioned above.)
 
With thought though... If you are going to stick with the lab route I wouldn't bother moving to TRI-X. XP2 is great film and scans well.
 
Generally speaking, Tri X is the B&W film that is the most versatile, yet it can give great tonality and decent sharpness. I would invest in a black changing bag and a developing tank right away. I have tried lots of developers, the most hassle free is Ilford DD-X, it is liquid, gives nice grain, decent sharpness and good tonality. Shoot at EI 400, develop for 9 minutes 1+9 at 20 deg C, agitate 10 secs at the beginning of each minute, then pour out , and pour in directly freshly diluted fixer, then fix 5-6 minutes, wash, and dry. Remember to dilute the developer and do the last wash in demineralized water.
Here is an example of Tri X in DD-X 1+9

4363354218_d8931d751e_b.jpg
 
I use both tri x and arista 400. From all that i have read and can tell they are one in the same.

Develop at home....if i can make it work anyone can! It is easy, cheap and takes only a few minutes once you have it down. I have a local shop that will do it for me at $5 per roll but it is still faster/cheaper/better and more fun to do it in the kitched/darkroom!
 
Thank you so much for the recent replies and the wonderful photos! Based on the replies,I am going to investigate doing my own developing. I know nothing about this...does this mean making my own negatives and prints? Is there any particular book or website? I know that I can always also come here for advice.
Adam
 
There is a Flickr site for Tri X "Tri X/5063". There are about 28 000 shots on it and 1500 Tri X addicts supplying it. Good reference site for what this 56 year old film can do.
It is not the finest grain, nor the smoothest tones - but if there ever was an "universal" bl/w film - Tri X is it!
Doesn't really matter what language you speak - go anywhere in the world and say "Tri X @ 400 - run it in D76 1:1 for 10-11 min" and you will be understood.
I have use it since 1957 and though kodak has changed some minor components in the film (backing, some fiddling with emulsion) - it is virtually the same film as when it was introduced.
I still use if - and I would be REALLY upset if some Kodak accountant decides that it should the stopped. More than 50% of Kodaks Black/White film is supposedly is Tri X emulsion!!!!
 
Adam14 said:
Thank you so much for the recent replies and the wonderful photos! Based on the replies,I am going to investigate doing my own developing. I know nothing about this...does this mean making my own negatives and prints? Is there any particular book or website? I know that I can always also come here for advice.
Adam
Click to expand...

Adam,

A good website would be APUG , It is a forum like this one but covers many more aspects of PHOTOGRAPHY, not just gear collecting. They do NOT like digital over there though, but everything else is fair game.
 
Last edited:
Adam,

go for it .... settle on one developer, it doesn't matter which and see what you get. If you chop and change you will get confused. Remember- half the fun of film is developing it yourself. Beware you will get hooked.

PS, get the biggest changing bag you can. I got a Harrison tent in the end - much easier, though a bit pricey, but cheaper than a darkroom.

Good luck

Simon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Developing Tri-X Suggestions?
Replies
13
Views
890
Muggins
Muggins
Rikard
Forgot my Tri-X in Rodinal method
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Rikard
Rikard
analoged
Kodak Tri X 35mm price drop
Replies
16
Views
2K
Mcary
M
M
Metallic Sheen on B&W Negs
Replies
13
Views
982
titrisol
titrisol
B
Working with outdated Delta 400
2
Replies
30
Views
827
Freakscene
Freakscene
Back
Top Bottom