- This topic is empty.
Tri-x ?
-
Folks,
I’ve ordered some rolls of Tri-x 400 in 35mm format and not having used it before was
wondering what you personally rate it at ? I have used ood tri-x 400 in 120 format but thats
not the same of course.My plan is to use it primarily for street photography with my new rangefinder.
Also, whats your preferred developer for it. I have Rodinal and Xtol. I’m figuring Xtol would be the best
of the two…Thanks
MarkIts a long time since I used Tri-X with Rodinal in 35mm so I can’t remember how grainy it looked. Xtol will provide finer grain but I guess it depends on what sort of look you want from your street photography. Tri-X and Rodinal is a very popular combination in 120. I have used it for years and grain is not a problem in this size.
I shoot it at 400 and dev in DDX, or, my personal favourite, shoot at anything between 1250 and 1600 and develop in Diafine. I love the look. Never used it in 120, for some reason I have a pile of older and expired delta and neopan I have to shoot in 120 before I can justify buying a pile of tri-x :-)
Woops, some examples …
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=tri-x+diafine&w=31589949%40N00&s=int” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;Actually, looking through my stream, I’ve also shot it at 1600 and stand developed it in rodinal …
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=trix+rodinal&w=31589949%40N00&ss=2&s=rec” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;Thanks lads, very useful !. Nice to see some photos taken with the various dev combos too.
I’ve done some stand development with Rodinal when it was all I had, works well enough and certainly seems to avoid the golf ball size grain.Actually, just checked and its ID-11 (in stock solution) I have. My XTOL is still in its packet… Better again :)
I forgot to say that the odd time I shoot 35mm Tri-X I use Tmax developer which works very well with it.
Gently over-exposed TriX in D76 is a classic and beautiful combination, and my own preferred combination. Exposing it about EI250/ 320, while still developing it at the times recommended for iso400, will give you the beautiful shadow detail and a tonality TriX is loved for in 35mm.
ID11 is effectively the same as D76, but I haven’t used ID11 myself. I use D76 mixed 1+1 (develop & discard), but not sure what that equates to with ID11.
When I need to push TriX, I use Diafine which gives a usable EI of approximately 1250, but I’ve only started using diafine and need to do a little testing. For now though, it’s been perfect for giving a 1.5- 2 stop push to TriX, and taming the high contrast night scenes I shoot when pushing TriX.
With the above developers, TriX gives me effectively an EI 250 and EI 1250 film, which with a reasonably fast lens, fits all my 35mm shooting needs perfectly.
Thanks Peter/Damien !
The few occasions I’ve used ID-11 it was at 1+1 also. Have plenty of stock left so will be using it up over the next month of so
as I’m planning on shooting a good bit of tri-x if possible.Will be interesting to hear more about the diafane. EI 1250 sounds very interesting…
TriX in diafine is definitely a nice option to have. I’m relatively new to using it, having put just two rolls through it since mixing it up, and it was the recent PI night shoot and the need for a faster film for some night shooting that pushed me towards diafine, allowing me to stay with TriX for most of my 35mm shooting.
A few things you should know about diafine, if considering it, include the fact it is a two bath developer; A and B, both mixed up from powder. Essentially, you pour in bath A, and allow the film to soak it up, before tipping it out and back into a bottle to re-use. Bath A causes no real film development. Bath B is then poured into your tank, and this is where the film development occurs. Bath B essentially activates the quantity of Bath A that was soaked into your film, and begins development.
Now this is where the good stuff happens. Because B is only the activator, the film developer is effectively the A that has soaked into the film, and the really nice part is that as the highlights/ densest part of your negative develop the developer wears out, and your highlights only get the needed amount of development. The shadows are a different matter, and as the development in the highlights peter out, development in the shadows continue, ensuring you get decent shadow detail to accompany your nice, non-overdeveloped highlight detail.
This process is similar what happens in most other 2 bath developers, splitting the development of the highlight and shadow detail, instead of combining it as most film developers do. Thus, 2 bath developers work quite well on mixed contrast rolls, and also serve to give you negatives that scan a little more easily, as it keeps highlight detail under control, preventing your negative from becoming too dense (the issue most scanners have with negatives).
Diafine gives most emulsions a speed boost, but this can vary from film to film, as essentially the speed boost is driven by the thickness of the film emulsion, and its capacity to absorb higher quantities of bath A. Older emulsions tend to work better than newer emulsions, which tend to have thinner bases, plus also as manufacturers refine their film making processes they tend to make their emulsions thinner, thus reducing the benefits of diafine. For the most part diafine will give most emulsions anywhere from a 0.5 to a 1.5 stop push.
Diafine also has a tendency of lasting a long time (numbered in the years). Once you ensure the baths never get cross-contaminated, top-up bath A from time to time (it diminishes as it gets absorbed into your film), and filter your solutions, you should have your diafine for a decent long time. Most people keep their diafine for a year or two, and then start again.
The developer is not without its drawbacks, and there is good reason it is not the miracle developer used by everyone. Namely, diafine tends to develop your negatives to a fixed level of contrast, which with images in normal lighting, people find a little on the flat side. In contrasty lighting, this attribute can be a god-send, and perfect for the likes of night shooting.
The other thing to be mindful of is that over-agitation in bath B can result in agitating the A in the emulsion out of there, and thus leading to potentially problematic development. Under-development on the other hand can lead to other issues, so it is good to agitate as instructed (2 gentle agitations every minute).
I haven’t gotten a chance to scrutinise my night shoot negatives too much yet, as I’ve been away from my darkroom for quite a while, and scanning the negatives on my flatbed has not been without its problems (dust problems mainly).
Anywho, just a little experience from a relatively new diafine user, and imagine Daire may have a bit to add on the matter :)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
