Developer That Goes Best With Tri-X

Thanks guys,
I appreciate all the responses. I really like the look of D76 from the samples above.
Could you guys post some more samples with different developers so i can see what I'm comparing it to?

Thanks again for all the help,
Kyle
 
kyler. said:
Thanks guys,
I appreciate all the responses. I really like the look of D76 from the samples above.
Could you guys post some more samples with different developers so i can see what I'm comparing it to?

Thanks again for all the help,
Kyle
Click to expand...

Also, it would be helpful if you could post your developing times at what temperature and how often you agitate.
Thanks,
 
i run d-76 and tmax. d-76 is a bit messy because of the mixing; tmax is easier to handle because it's a concentrate.
d-76 is much less expensive than tmax, but tmax is soooooooooooo handy ...
 
Thank you Chris,
I love your shots and the way they come out, although I'm not sure if I will be able to use your developing times as I shoot the tri-x at 400.
Does this matter? or can I still use your recommended times?

EDIT: I just reread your post above, I take it that it doesn't make much of a difference.
 
5081897967_08f8f31df5.jpg


(flash though umbrella)
5277656325_23decc195c.jpg


I use, for now, 500ml HC-110h with 2.5ml of Rodinal added, minimal agitation.
 
I also completely agree with Chris.

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
D-76 1+1 is the classic choice for Tri-X and what I use most of the time. It works beautifully on the hundreds of rolls of Tri-X I've developed in it. Rodinal is beautiful to but grittier looking, with sharper grain (though it is not really big or ugly) and a little harsher tonality. Works great for some stuff, some prefer it for everything.

Xtol and Tmax Developer works well too. D-76 1+1 would be my first choice to try Tri-X to start.
Click to expand...
 
charjohncarter said:
I use, for now, 500ml HC-110h with 2.5ml of Rodinal added, minimal agitation.
Click to expand...

Would you mind providing more info? I am interested.

I assume you are using dilution h for hc-110 since you are mixing with rodinal and discard?
Times?
Agitation?
TriX in 35 or 120mm?

Thanks, eager to try.
 
kyler. said:
Thank you Chris,
I love your shots and the way they come out, although I'm not sure if I will be able to use your developing times as I shoot the tri-x at 400.
Does this matter? or can I still use your recommended times?

EDIT: I just reread your post above, I take it that it doesn't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...

The real speed of tri-x in D-76 1+1 is 320. I scientifically measured it with a densitometer, and my findings are agreed to by just about everyone who has done proper testing. If you shoot at 400, you'll get slight underexposure. Does it matter? If you want the quality I get, then yes, it does. You'll get people here who will insist that the small underexposure won't be visible. People tell me all the time that they want pictures like mine, but they have hangups like insisting that film must be shot at the 'box speed'. The ISO speed is determined using a developer that no one uses in the real world and developing times that give too much contrast. Few films give the box speed in normal developers at normal developing times, but some of those who say that may have meters that overexpose slightly, so they may be getting 400 with their gear!

Now in my earlier post, I mentioned testing for yourself. Thats because meters can vary. If yours overexposes a little, you'll be ok at 400. If it underexposes a little, you'll get bad results since 400 on a properly calibrated meter is underexposing slightly. All of my handheld meters and in-camera meters are calibrated to match each other and are accurate. I'm a perfectionist and have gone to the trouble of having them all properly calibrated and doing scientific testing of films because I want my images to be as good as they can be from a technical standpoint so that I can concentrate on the subject and the image without worrying if the photo will be ruined by a technical fault like poor exposure. Your results may vary though depending on how accurate your meter is and how you meter. You might get best results at 400, or 200 or 320 or somewhere else!
 
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
D-76 1+1 is the classic choice for Tri-X and what I use most of the time. It works beautifully on the hundreds of rolls of Tri-X I've developed in it. Rodinal is beautiful to but grittier looking, with sharper grain (though it is not really big or ugly) and a little harsher tonality. Works great for some stuff, some prefer it for everything.

Xtol and Tmax Developer works well too. D-76 1+1 would be my first choice to try Tri-X to start.

the-bean-coffeeshop.jpg



dad_6-6-10.jpg



snap-one.jpg


All Tri-X 35mm in D-76 1+1, EI-320
Click to expand...

Great pictures, Chris! Plus one for TriX and D-76 1:1!
 
I use for TX at EI 320-400 Rodinal 1+50; EI 600-800 Promicrol 1+14 and EI 1000-1600 Diafine.
Rodinal and Promicrol works sharp and with nice grain, Diafine for compensating high contrast.
 
I use mainly XTOL and Rodinal with TriX ISO 400.

XTOL 1+1:
4752610917_0e39dab6ea.jpg


XTOL 1+1:
4786882297_d8e81bd337.jpg


XTOL 1+1:
4519024966_18ca3c264b.jpg



Rodinal 1+50:
4832042456_442d93af69.jpg


Rodinal 1+50:
4827309844_b616ec42be.jpg



Rodinal 1+25:
3736448072_e07f8fda22.jpg
 
Last edited:
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
The real speed of tri-x in D-76 1+1 is 320. I scientifically measured it with a densitometer, and my findings are agreed to by just about everyone who has done proper testing. If you shoot at 400, you'll get slight underexposure. Does it matter? If you want the quality I get, then yes, it does. You'll get people here who will insist that the small underexposure won't be visible. People tell me all the time that they want pictures like mine, but they have hangups like insisting that film must be shot at the 'box speed'. The ISO speed is determined using a developer that no one uses in the real world and developing times that give too much contrast. Few films give the box speed in normal developers at normal developing times, but some of those who say that may have meters that overexpose slightly, so they may be getting 400 with their gear!

Now in my earlier post, I mentioned testing for yourself. Thats because meters can vary. If yours overexposes a little, you'll be ok at 400. If it underexposes a little, you'll get bad results since 400 on a properly calibrated meter is underexposing slightly. All of my handheld meters and in-camera meters are calibrated to match each other and are accurate. I'm a perfectionist and have gone to the trouble of having them all properly calibrated and doing scientific testing of films because I want my images to be as good as they can be from a technical standpoint so that I can concentrate on the subject and the image without worrying if the photo will be ruined by a technical fault like poor exposure. Your results may vary though depending on how accurate your meter is and how you meter. You might get best results at 400, or 200 or 320 or somewhere else!
Click to expand...

Chris, do you do separate tests for each camera to allow for shutter variance? Do you allow for the inconsistencies within the same shutter, from one shutter speed to another? I did the tests you suggest with my Nikon F years ago and came up with FP4+ at ISO 80 for that camera, But when I shot with another camera (same hand-held meter, I got different results. I haven't been able to find anyone who'll do the densitometer tests lately, so I have to just judge from results.
 
Vics said:
Chris, do you do separate tests for each camera to allow for shutter variance? Do you allow for the inconsistencies within the same shutter, from one shutter speed to another? I did the tests you suggest with my Nikon F years ago and came up with FP4+ at ISO 80 for that camera, But when I shot with another camera (same hand-held meter, I got different results. I haven't been able to find anyone who'll do the densitometer tests lately, so I have to just judge from results.
Click to expand...

There really isn't any, as none of my cameras are ancient and I have them serviced if they begin to give incorrect exposures, which I have only had to do to two cameras over the years. Several of my cameras also have electronic shutters, which are very consistent. I don't use antique cameras like so many people here do. I have really tried to love old cameras like Leica M2 and Nikon F, etc. but I have been burned everytime I have tried to own one with equipment that just didn't work 100% everytime. I despise stuff that doesn't 'just work' because it makes it hard for me to concentrate on the image if I have to worry about gear that doesn't give perfect results every time.

A lot of people here don't mind kludgy stuff like remembering that one camera's meter is different than another's or one lens has focus shift and to get good focus you have to lean in a few inches after focusing, etc. I don't have the time or patience for bull**** like that. I buy gear that 'just works' and if it doesn't I return it, and if I've had it a while and it stops working 100% I have it repaired. I have a few items on my shelf now that i no longer use because they have minor faults that need work and i haven't had the money to fix them yet.
 
LeicaM3 said:
Would you mind providing more info? I am interested.

I assume you are using dilution h for hc-110 since you are mixing with rodinal and discard?
Times?
Agitation?
TriX in 35 or 120mm?

Thanks, eager to try.
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry dilution h. So 500ml of HC-110h, then add 2.5ml of Rodinal. Agitation is 30 seconds to start with 3 inversions at 10,7,4,1 minutes with a total time of 11 minutes and 45 seconds. Everything is at 20 degrees C (68 F).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top