TriX at ISO1600 Developer Recommendations?

K

ktmrider

Well-known
Local time
11:06 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
1,363
Back in my day (early 1970's) when I had to shoot night high school football or other available darkness subjects, I would push TriX to 1200 to 2400, develope in acufine or diafine and print on No 4 or 5 paper. A lot of it was for newspaper work so I did not need great black and white prints.

So, my question is that technique still the best way to push TriX or HP5? Any better developers then Acufine or Diafine to achieve high ISO?

I know pushing film is not optimum and digital rules higher ISO. Am wondering if much has changed in this area since 1970.
 
I don't really think so. You can still use Acufine or Diafine, or developers like Xtol or DD-X. SPUR has made a speed enhancing developer lately, but I haven't tried it yet.
 
digital's not "ruling" high iso, not for black and white. It's just different.
You have to know what you want from your iso1600 film, smooth stuff or a healthy amount of grain.
It wont give you the smooth stuff if you use tri-x at 1600 (and magnify it a lot). But it does look great.
Diafine is fine @ 1600. Lowers the contrast a bit.
Rodinal also does it well at 1600 or even further.
Other options i haven't tried.
 
Another vote for Diafine. It's practically idiot-proof, which helps me a lot, and can be reused for a year or more. The lower contrast is great if you're going to scan and is still useable for darkroom printing. I've tried Xtol for this and did Tri-X at 1600 that way for a number of years, but still prefer Diafine. Whatever works for you is best.
 
Well no one has mentioned stock D76 yet, so I am :)
For Tri-X rated at 1600 I give 11 min at 20C.

As for Diafine, sure you can rate your Tri-X at 1600 but personally I don't like thin negatives and would only go up to 640 max in Diafine.
 
I use Tmax developer. One can push very well with this developer.
It does not exhaust easily so you can really dig in with it.
Highlight detail can be lost with too much agitation.
Keep in mind the scene as shot. If you have highlight detail you are concerned about protecting reduce agitation from normal when pushing.

I mix Tmax Develooper 1:4 and soup up at 20c.
Cheers!
 
another vote for D76

another vote for D76

lawrence said:
Well no one has mentioned stock D76 yet, so I am :)
For Tri-X rated at 1600 I give 11 min at 20C.

As for Diafine, sure you can rate your Tri-X at 1600 but personally I don't like thin negatives and would only go up to 640 max in Diafine.
Click to expand...

Agreed - D76 - not as one-shot dilution, but full strength (the effect is different) - is more refined, beautiful mid-tones, subtle, though obvious, grain structure, highlights not too blocked (but try "pre-flashing" the paper.

On other hand for real contrasty push with killer grain, HC 110 (is that still out there?)
 
ktmrider said:
Back in my day (early 1970's) when I had to shoot night high school football or other available darkness subjects, I would push TriX to 1200 to 2400, develope in acufine or diafine and print on No 4 or 5 paper. A lot of it was for newspaper work so I did not need great black and white prints.

So, my question is that technique still the best way to push TriX or HP5? Any better developers then Acufine or Diafine to achieve high ISO?

I know pushing film is not optimum and digital rules higher ISO. Am wondering if much has changed in this area since 1970.
Click to expand...

I have to agree that digital rules; 3200-6400 is nothing today.

But I persist with film for many reason, and like the pictures I get. The developers you mention are still my favorites for this, Acufine and Diafine. Unlike a lot of people, I don't seem to get anything remotely like a usable EI 1600 out of standard development in Diafine today; I run it through the process two times and then do get a result that works well for me in the 1600-3200 range. That is A, B, very thorough rinse, A, B, then finish as usual. This may be due to changes in the films over the years. Both TX and HP5 Plus work well for me this way.

That is mostly what I've done so far since I know it will work, but I think I may end up preferring Acufine. I'm experimenting now to see what I can get out of TX and HP5 Plus in Acufine.

Of course an awful lot depends on what you are trying to do. You are obviously not going to get the equivalent of ISO 1600 shadow exposure, but I've been able to get usable pictures at the edge of what I can do with 1600-3200 exposures. Other people want the high contrast, or grainy, pushed look and might want to go a completely different route.
 
Yes, HC110 is still around. I recently tried dil B for 12:12 @ 74F. Liked the results but a little too contrasty...need adjustment.
 
Turtle said:
Xtol 1+1.

Works like a charm.
Click to expand...

I agree.
I find it better than Perceptol, Microphen and DDX. Best developer for pushing IMO... I use 27 Celsius with 10 strong inversions every third minute for grain and contrast control. 15min/21min for 1600/3200, for scanning. For wet printing, shorter time/lower temp.
If you're interested, with TMax400 and careful metering, you can go up to 6400 (27min).
Cheers,
Juan
 
I've used DD-X and Microphen, they're ideal for pushing.

Widespread consensus is also for HC-110, XTol, TMax and of course Acufine too.
 
jslabovitz said:
Microphen is great for this. I use it for either HP5 or Tri-X when I shoot faster than box speed. All the shots for my letterpress documentary project were done with Tri-X @ 1600 in Microphen (mostly with a Rolleiflex Automat): http://johnlabovitz.com/projects/letterpress
Click to expand...

John, beautiful work on the letterpress project. I've always been fascinated with hot lead type and presses. I've been around printing much of my career. The beginning of my interest came when I went with my mother to the newspaper where we lived and the press room boss took me back and showed me how they set type on a lynotype machine and formed the lead cylinders with the type. What amazing machines and amazing people that ran them.

Great work!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom