Tri-Xgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
This seems to the favourite film of many, so what is your favoured EI and developer combination, and why?
Particular and/or comparative comments on PMK Pyro, or other pyro-based developers, DiXactol, Rodinal (1:25?), D-76 1:1 are particularly welcome.
Or, if you prefer HP5+, why, and what is your preferred EI and developer for this film?
Do most of you stick to one EI, or do you vary it depending on the different effective film speed that will arise on N, N+, or N- development?
-- fw (firstname.lastname@example.org), August 11, 2000
I use Plus-X in 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 with D-76 1:1 almost exclusively. Why? Because I know it and understand it. For normal development I develop four to six 8x10s for 8-9 minutes at 80F degrees, N+1 for 10- 12 minutes, etc. Times vary according to the number of sheets being developed, and of course the number of sheets being developed at one time varies depending on format. I use open trays using 1.5 to 2 liter (for 8x10s in 11x14 trays) one-shot batches. I find that these times are great for my old gear but are on the plus side when I develop 4x5s shot with modern lenses. Sorry for the run-on.
-- Chad Jarvis (email@example.com), August 11, 2000.
I use HP-5+ instead of Tri-x for two reasons: 1) It does not have the long toe of Tri-x. 2) It is cheaper.
I develop it in a Jobo, with D-23 1:1. My normal EI is 200 with my Sekonic L-508 and EI 400 with my Pentax spotmeter V. (This goes to show you how much meters can vary, and how using someone else's EI is almost useless. Both meters are nearly new, and agree with other meters of the same brand and model.) I vary my EI from EI 80-230 (based on the Sekonic's reading) to achieve N-4 through N+2.
-- William Marderness (firstname.lastname@example.org), August 11, 2000.
HP5 developed in Ilfospeed diluted 1-100 for 12 to 18 mins depending on speed used is my favorite - why: 1. It is dirt cheap 2. I like the apperance of Hp5 grain structure when I rate at 1600 and crop in tight on the scan - until mid September when I go to the college of building and printing in Glasgow where I'll get access to some decent enlargers 3. Did I mention it was cheap 4. I recently found an article I was looking for in an MPP users newsletter/gazette which gave me the correct times, and refered the formula from a Practica/35mm users magazine
-- David Kirk (David_J_Kirk@hotmail.com), August 12, 2000.
I have used Tri-X for more years than I like to admit to. It is a fnie film. I use HC-110 for developing, solution B. I have also used D-76 and T-Max RS. My favorite is HC-110. I like the edge effect. I rate the 320 ASA/ISO film at 160 and develop for 5 1/2 minutes for standard processing. Recently I have been using a lot of Ilford HP-5 rated at 320 and developed in ID-11. I really like that combination. Excellent sharpness and contrast. Ilford is a bit cheaper and just as good as Tri-X. I have made some beautiful images with the Ilford this summer. It has great response to filters. I am sure I will continue to use both films. Good shooting, Doug.
-- Doug Paramore (email@example.com), August 12, 2000.
I have used Tri-X for ten years plus in a variety of lighting conditions. It has a feel and look that IMHO Tmax 400 and 100 cannot duplicate. I don't demean those films; my second favorite film is Tmax 100, again for its feel. Processing: I use Tmax RS A+B diluted 1:9 in a Jobo for 6 min N, or I use FG-7, and I use dilution, not time, to achieve N-2 to N+2. IMHO FG-7 is a developer that requires more attention than it gets. Bob
-- Bob Moulton (firstname.lastname@example.org), August 13, 2000.
I have used TriX almost exclusively for two years now. First developed in HC110 (1:9; 160ASA; 6 min N; 8min N+1; tray 68F; shuffling technique; 6/tray) but more recently in Hutching's PMK (frm Formulary; 68F;tray; shuffling technique; 8min N; N+1 10min; rated at 320ASA using Minolta spotmeter-as noted by another contributor meters make a big difference. Trix is gives super gradation, fabulous edge/acutance with PMK.
-- Alan Barton (email@example.com), August 17, 2000.