Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I have done 100+ rolls in D76 now and switched to one of the 'derivatives" of it. Adox MQ - contains less Sodium Sulphite (80gr/1000 ml rather than the D76 100gr/1000 ml). A bit "harsher" grain - but sharper edges. I have been using it with a replenisher and it works well, though I have to replace my filtration system - lots of little spots! One batch of Adox MQ (2000 ml) and 1000 ml of replenisher will give you 45-50 rolls capacity.
Some stuff is up on the "Back to Basics" set on our Flickr.
Some stuff is up on the "Back to Basics" set on our Flickr.
dfoo
Well-known
Do you do 5 rolls at a time in a 1.5L tank? If so, what dilution and times do you use?
35photo
Well-known
The best most simple film/developer combo in the history of photography. Its how many people who started in the 35mm film era started with. Its also the most versatile combo as well...you can push it pull it, over under expose it...It has so much room for error its crazy. I've used many other films and developers....which have been good. My tastes have changed though the years in terms how I want an image to look, it doesn't have to be the sharpest, the film with the least amount of grain. Its all about tone and feel for me. At the end of the day when there are fewer films out there these days you really appreciate how good this film/developer combo really is.
twopointeight
Well-known
Tom, good to see this post, timely for me as I just made a decision to go back to film Leicas for personal work and digital for jobs only. I left TX for Neopan some years ago and souped in DDX. I like liquid developers. Is there a liquid D76? DDX gets pricey. Have you scanned TX/D76 negs? Wonder if that's a scanner friendly combo? Tom, be well, and hope to visit one day. Is Cradoc around I wonder?
n5jrn
Well-known
How well (and how long) do you find D76 keeps after you open the packet and initially mix it?
I haven't done any developing myself, but i have a feeling that's going to change after my upcoming move (where I'll both have the space for a darkroom, and where I'll be in a small coastal town without much in the way of a film-processing infrastructure).
I've been researching film/developer combinations and had pretty much settled on HC110 because the undiluted syrup has a reputation for a long (as in years) shelf life, and I'm not sure how often I'll be having the time to soup my own film. It would be a pity (both economically and ecologically) to end up having to pour nearly a liter of undiluted D76 down the drain just because too much time has elapsed since I mixed it.
I haven't done any developing myself, but i have a feeling that's going to change after my upcoming move (where I'll both have the space for a darkroom, and where I'll be in a small coastal town without much in the way of a film-processing infrastructure).
I've been researching film/developer combinations and had pretty much settled on HC110 because the undiluted syrup has a reputation for a long (as in years) shelf life, and I'm not sure how often I'll be having the time to soup my own film. It would be a pity (both economically and ecologically) to end up having to pour nearly a liter of undiluted D76 down the drain just because too much time has elapsed since I mixed it.
n5jrn
Well-known
With Tri-X, of course. My research indicates it has a reputation for being forgiving of both minor exposure and developing errors, and the cost is quite reasonable if one orders a bunch of it from B&H or Freestyle.
RanceEric
The name is Rance
Great post, great photographs. Well done!
I recently have decided to go back to shooting mainly Tri-X and developing myself the same way (but in the bathroom).. makes me really miss the darkrom from college.. *sigh*
I recently have decided to go back to shooting mainly Tri-X and developing myself the same way (but in the bathroom).. makes me really miss the darkrom from college.. *sigh*
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Turtle
Mentor
While this is undoubtedly a cracking combo, I can't help but feel that Xtol 1+1 is even better. Cheaper, longer lasting, easier to mix, more stable on the shelf, less grain and more speed. D76 is cracking, but for those out there who have not used many devs, don't go thinking that classic inherently means better. TriX allows for great negs every time form a whole range of bog standard developers, like DDX, Xtol, D76 etc and you'd be really hard pressed to get excited about the differences once prints are up on the wall. One of the reasons I have come back to TriX is because you can run it through so many devs and get either very similar results (as earlier, aside form speed) or very different results (pyro, rodinal etc).
dogbunny
Registered Boozer
I'm a neophyte developer. I bought D76 because it was the cheapest in the store. I'm fixin to do a year of B&W in D76. I got a lot of help from peeps here. I bought a roll of every film Ilford makes, a roll of Trixie, some T-max, some Neopan and Acros. I've only developed the rolls of Tri-X, Acros, and T-max 400 so far.
With a squinty eye up to the light in the living room, the roll of Tri-X looks better--or more compelling to me. I have a few rolls left to shoot, then I will scan them all and make a choice, but so far Tri-X looks to be the one. Maybe after I scan I will think differently--I dunno. I have some time off from work this week. More time to shoot. Fun stuff.
DB
With a squinty eye up to the light in the living room, the roll of Tri-X looks better--or more compelling to me. I have a few rolls left to shoot, then I will scan them all and make a choice, but so far Tri-X looks to be the one. Maybe after I scan I will think differently--I dunno. I have some time off from work this week. More time to shoot. Fun stuff.
DB
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I standardized my TriX/D76 a long time ago. Five reel Pateron tanks (1500 ml of developer). Time is 10 to 10 min 30 sec - somewhat depending on the light condition. Agitation every 60 sec (three inversion, shake and tap against the edge of the sink). My TriX is mostly shot as "Sunny f16" - i.e. guessing the exposure. Pretty well bullet proof combination.
I rarely push film - though TriX is good for that too. You can get away with 800 iso or even 1200 iso - some loss of shadow detail, but still printable.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I usually dump left over D76 after three weeks. I might last longer, but I rather err on the side of caution. The PH goes up and you get some rather ugly contrast with "stale" D76. I mix 1 gallon batches of it (about 25 rolls) and I can excuse shooting some more film to avoid having to dump it!
sparrow6224
Well-known
Tom, Your protocols, 30-second initial agitation, ten seconds (3 tiwsts and turns?) every minute thereafter -- or is it five seconds every thirty thereafter? -- anyway it reminded me that Ansel Adams says in The Negative that whatever time you are using shouldn't "begin" until AFTER that first 30 seconds -- since, he says, the film hasn't been sufficiently in contact with the developer until then. Is that how you do it? Ie Ten minutes after that initial half minute? I can't bring myself to do it that way so have been splitting the diff -- figuring 15 seconds can't be that big a deal in either direction.
Also, such times are recommended at a given temperature. How do you keep the developer in the tank at the same cool temperature for ten minutes while it's working?
Thanks!
Vince
Also, such times are recommended at a given temperature. How do you keep the developer in the tank at the same cool temperature for ten minutes while it's working?
Thanks!
Vince
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Vince,Adams used mainly large format cameras - huge surfaces to cover with developer. With 35m you have more reels and stuff.
I do some active agitation initially, 30 sec "shake, rattle and roll" - let the tank sit for 20-25 sec and then do regular agitation.
Timing starts, once the developer is in the tank and ends once I start poring it out. I have and add'l procedure that gives 20-30 sec. longer time. Start timing after initial agitation and end once the tank is drained - usually marked as 10+ min in my tags.
A lot depends n your exposure - shooting mostly Sunny F16 and rating the film @ around 320 - it seems to work.
As for temperature - my darkroom is pretty consistently @ 20+C and my water supply is controlled to give me that for wash too (220v/3 phase flow-heater).
TriX and D76 is pretty sturdy - small shifts in temperature. agitation etc doesn't make much of a difference.
It is mostly critical with slow, thin emulsion films, where even 15-30 sec difference can show up. TriX was (and is) still a very "robust" film and can take some abuse. It was initially designed as a "press film" - with rather sloppy exposures (in the 50's handheld meters were far and few between).
To each his own of course - some like nice thin negatives, others, like me, like some meat in the shadows and reasonable highlights and go for "denser" negatives.
I do some active agitation initially, 30 sec "shake, rattle and roll" - let the tank sit for 20-25 sec and then do regular agitation.
Timing starts, once the developer is in the tank and ends once I start poring it out. I have and add'l procedure that gives 20-30 sec. longer time. Start timing after initial agitation and end once the tank is drained - usually marked as 10+ min in my tags.
A lot depends n your exposure - shooting mostly Sunny F16 and rating the film @ around 320 - it seems to work.
As for temperature - my darkroom is pretty consistently @ 20+C and my water supply is controlled to give me that for wash too (220v/3 phase flow-heater).
TriX and D76 is pretty sturdy - small shifts in temperature. agitation etc doesn't make much of a difference.
It is mostly critical with slow, thin emulsion films, where even 15-30 sec difference can show up. TriX was (and is) still a very "robust" film and can take some abuse. It was initially designed as a "press film" - with rather sloppy exposures (in the 50's handheld meters were far and few between).
To each his own of course - some like nice thin negatives, others, like me, like some meat in the shadows and reasonable highlights and go for "denser" negatives.
sparrow6224
Well-known
Tom,
What does it mean to "rate the film @ 320"? In sunny 16 terms , if I'm using a 125/250/500 camera, or a 200/500 camera like the IIIf, or a 100/250 camera like the Contax IIa, you're shooting at f16/500 in full sunlight, yes?
So does that mean you develop at 320, which would be to cut the box time by 20 percent, which certainly you don't do -- box time on Trix is 9-3/4 mins. So I'm baffled by what rating it at 320 means.
As far as Adams and his conviction, I think he just worked out all his own times based on the principle that no matter what the film or the developer the first 30 seconds didn't count. After all, he put the sheet into the full tray of developer, according to his methodology, and pressed it down so it was "covered" about as quickly or more quickly than our pot of multiple film reels would be; I think he just experimented and came up with times that worked for him and never included the first 30 secs agitation.
Many thanks as always for sharing your sage advice.
What does it mean to "rate the film @ 320"? In sunny 16 terms , if I'm using a 125/250/500 camera, or a 200/500 camera like the IIIf, or a 100/250 camera like the Contax IIa, you're shooting at f16/500 in full sunlight, yes?
So does that mean you develop at 320, which would be to cut the box time by 20 percent, which certainly you don't do -- box time on Trix is 9-3/4 mins. So I'm baffled by what rating it at 320 means.
As far as Adams and his conviction, I think he just worked out all his own times based on the principle that no matter what the film or the developer the first 30 seconds didn't count. After all, he put the sheet into the full tray of developer, according to his methodology, and pressed it down so it was "covered" about as quickly or more quickly than our pot of multiple film reels would be; I think he just experimented and came up with times that worked for him and never included the first 30 secs agitation.
Many thanks as always for sharing your sage advice.
sparrow6224
Well-known
PS I have to look this up, I'm not positive, but I think also that Adams didn't stop the clock until the film was in the stop bath -- under the belief, similar to the first, that nothing was stopping the developing process on the well coated sheet until that stop bath hit it. Which means he could do five rolls of Tri X counting from after the first 30 seconds' agitation until the stop bath fills the tank; and you could count as you do; and you both could call it ten minutes and have processed the film for the exact same amount of time. Although 30 seconds to empty the five-roll tank and fill it with stop bath is a bit tight. generally it takes me about 45.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Vince, I use 1/250 as my "standard" speed - rating it at 320 just means that I "crack" the aperture down 1/3 -1/2 stop from "Sunny f16". Films like TriX and XX has enough latitude to handle that. All my cameras are set at 1/250, f8 and at infinity when they are idle - this way I know which directions to turn everything to adjust or compensate. Makes life a bit simpler and I dont have to look at the lens or shutter speed dial.
Adams was a perfectionist and shooting large format you dont really bracket to much! With 35 you have the advantage that you can shoot a 2nd frame at a slightly different exposure - at least in most cases.
As for timing and procedure when you process film - it is based on experience more than anything else. I find that a TriX negative shot at around 320 (Sunny F16) and processed the way I do it - gives me a slightly "meaty" negative - to many they look over developed by about 1/2 stop - but I can pull details in the shadows easily.
The stop bath as a "Timing sequence" end would work with a large 8x10" negative - I dont use stop bath, just a quick wash. Most likely over the years I have incorporated the slight additional developing that would happen. I once tested this and could not see any difference between stop-bath or plain water - even went so far as to run it through my old McBeth Densitometer - no significant difference.
If you ask black and white shooters about their processing - everybody is different, at least with 35 and 120 film.
It is a good idea to start with the spec-sheet recommendations and establish a base-line. After that you just work it until it fits your style.
Also depends on where you live - Pacific Northwest is slightly "softer" light than a desert or equatorial area, so you compensate for that. Most of the year the true Sunny f16 here is closer to 1/250 @ f16 with 400 iso film. Only in the midsummer does the 1/500 rule apply!
Adams was a perfectionist and shooting large format you dont really bracket to much! With 35 you have the advantage that you can shoot a 2nd frame at a slightly different exposure - at least in most cases.
As for timing and procedure when you process film - it is based on experience more than anything else. I find that a TriX negative shot at around 320 (Sunny F16) and processed the way I do it - gives me a slightly "meaty" negative - to many they look over developed by about 1/2 stop - but I can pull details in the shadows easily.
The stop bath as a "Timing sequence" end would work with a large 8x10" negative - I dont use stop bath, just a quick wash. Most likely over the years I have incorporated the slight additional developing that would happen. I once tested this and could not see any difference between stop-bath or plain water - even went so far as to run it through my old McBeth Densitometer - no significant difference.
If you ask black and white shooters about their processing - everybody is different, at least with 35 and 120 film.
It is a good idea to start with the spec-sheet recommendations and establish a base-line. After that you just work it until it fits your style.
Also depends on where you live - Pacific Northwest is slightly "softer" light than a desert or equatorial area, so you compensate for that. Most of the year the true Sunny f16 here is closer to 1/250 @ f16 with 400 iso film. Only in the midsummer does the 1/500 rule apply!
sparrow6224
Well-known
Many thanks, Tom. This has all been enormously helpful.
V
V
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Now down to my last five rolls of Arista/TriX in "home brewed" Adox MQ. Back to Basics continuing with other D76 clone "soups".
The Adox gives a bit of an edge to the negatives, the lesser amount of Sodium Sulphite (80 gr/1000 ml versus 100 gr/1000 ml) makes a difference. The 320 iso rating is pretty close to the speed of the film - and allows me to shoot XX and XXX intermixed.
Next up is mixing a 5 ltr pack of ID 11 (old enough to vote in today's Federal Election!). I dont expect a major difference between the ID 11 and the D76 - they are basically the same - but it gives me an excuse for using it up.
So far, after 150+ rolls - there is really no reason for using any other soup than D76 - it is very smooth, tolerant of "missed" guesses as to exposure etc. However, trying them all out gives me a reason for shooting more!
During, what we all hope will be a bright, warm and sunny summer, I will start playing with the various divided D76 formulas - and there are a lot of variations of these.
The Flickr set "Back to Basics" now has some 475 shots on it - I will probably limit it to 1000 shots in the end.
If you want more information on the various soups that work with TriX - go to the RFf set "Shooting with Eastman Kodak's Double X" - there is a site there with information galore on developers. TriX and XX is close enough that you can easily extrapolate times and dilutions for TriX from the XX information.
The Adox gives a bit of an edge to the negatives, the lesser amount of Sodium Sulphite (80 gr/1000 ml versus 100 gr/1000 ml) makes a difference. The 320 iso rating is pretty close to the speed of the film - and allows me to shoot XX and XXX intermixed.
Next up is mixing a 5 ltr pack of ID 11 (old enough to vote in today's Federal Election!). I dont expect a major difference between the ID 11 and the D76 - they are basically the same - but it gives me an excuse for using it up.
So far, after 150+ rolls - there is really no reason for using any other soup than D76 - it is very smooth, tolerant of "missed" guesses as to exposure etc. However, trying them all out gives me a reason for shooting more!
During, what we all hope will be a bright, warm and sunny summer, I will start playing with the various divided D76 formulas - and there are a lot of variations of these.
The Flickr set "Back to Basics" now has some 475 shots on it - I will probably limit it to 1000 shots in the end.
If you want more information on the various soups that work with TriX - go to the RFf set "Shooting with Eastman Kodak's Double X" - there is a site there with information galore on developers. TriX and XX is close enough that you can easily extrapolate times and dilutions for TriX from the XX information.
daninjc
Well-known
I've been using triX in D76 for the last months and I'm not particularly happy with it - but I want to learn it well since so many people seem to get great results with this combination! My problem is that if I compare my negs to some older ones developed by labs, mine look thinner, with less punchy contrast.
I've been developing 2 rolls in a 4-reel tank in D76 1:1 @ 20C. I started with the suggested 9 min but the results were quite disappointing, so I increased progressively the time and now I'm down to 11 min, still not comparable to the results from the labs, so I'm really tempted to go a little longer than that, to see if I get better results... Anyone developing for around 12 min? Is there something else I could be doing wrong?
I've been developing 2 rolls in a 4-reel tank in D76 1:1 @ 20C. I started with the suggested 9 min but the results were quite disappointing, so I increased progressively the time and now I'm down to 11 min, still not comparable to the results from the labs, so I'm really tempted to go a little longer than that, to see if I get better results... Anyone developing for around 12 min? Is there something else I could be doing wrong?