Chemical advice for Tri-X

Hi
I guess you heard this before...I searched around a bit but could not find any straight answers....so here it goes...

I'am just about to start develop my own film again, it's been more than 10 years since last time so I guess i'am a bit rusty....

I intend to buy a used kit of equipment but I need to order some chemicals...

What chemicals do I need, developer/stop?/fix/anything else??.. :confused:
and what type/brand do you recommend, I think i used D76 earlier...

I will mainly use Tri-X film

Many thanks for your help!

/Mattias

Tri-X and D76/ID-11 are a classic combination.

Listen to the sage advise of Anscojohn, he will not steer you wrong. D-76 is the standard by which all others are compared.

Hi Mattias,

Regarding developers, Tri-X can probably be developed successfully in anything that's commercially available -- in addition to specialized chemistry mixed from scratch. Everyone has their own preference and personality that they bring to this great film. As John states, above, D76 and ID-11 (Ilford's version) are a classic film/developer combination, and you won't go wrong with those.

For developer, I use Xtol (diluted 1:1), most of the time, and sometimes Rodinal (1:50) -- just my preferences. I'm sure you'll get other great suggestions in this thread.
In lieu of an acid stop bath, for 35mm, I use water.
For fixer, I use Ilford Rapid Fixer.
For hypo clearing agent, I use Heico Perma Wash.
And finally, Kodak Photo-Flo -- wetting agent to prevent/minimize drying marks.

Good luck, and have fun!

Andrew

I also use XTOL, water for stop bath, Ilford Rapid fixer and Photoflo. I shoot mostly Tri-X.

For a first step, I'd go with D76 (1+1) and a rapid fixer. Water for stop. I could also make the argument for Rodinal, but I will just say start with a standard developer and if you want to try out other chemistry later, you will have probably figured out why you don't like the standard developers.

Acid stop bath is not necessary for film. 1 minute in water works fine.

There are two types of fixers: Hypo (Kodak fix, for example) and Rapid (I use Sprint Systems Record Speed Fixer). For film I always use rapid - it is faster - but I do use hypo for some prints, specifically iron-silver process prints. Hypo has the saving grace of being dirt cheap when bought in bulk. You do not necessarily need a hardening fixer for film, so do not worry about hardening agents if you are processing roll film.

You're new at this? Great. Get some D-76, stop bath, fixer, and Photoflo. That's it. Nothing fancy.

wow, thanks for all quick replies!

I guess i will go for D76 and a rapid fixer, I was a bit curious about Rodinal but maybe it is vise to start with something basic and then take it from there...

Can't wait until I get the gear set up and can get started!

Thanks!
/Mattias

Mattias,

Good luck and keep it simple (as it should be). Don't bog yourself down with too many choices and try to master one film/developer combination that will give you fairly consistent, repeatable results (assuming proper exposure and few other variables).

As others have written above, you do only need a few items to get you going. As far as developer, do check out HC110 with Tri-X, as it is very economical, used straight from syrup, and has a very long shelf life once opened. It can give you beautiful tones and good control. I have just developed one roll yesterday and scanned and you can check out a few here..http://www.flickr.com/photos/leicaman/
Details: Tri-X shot at box speed, Patterson 500ml tank, HC 110 Dilution H (1:63 = 8ml of syrup and rest distilled water), 8.25 minutes @ 75 degrees, two rolling pin agitation+1 inversion at the beginning and 2 rolling pin at the 4 minute mark. Very fine shadow detail and well controlled highlights for this particular situation (11:00 am, sunny summer day). It has nice, tight grain and it prints even better than what you see scanned at 72dpi output obviously. Hope this helps and don't forget to have lots of fun!!

Max

D-76 is my developer friend.

kahnlund said:

I was a bit curious about Rodinal but maybe it is vise to start with something basic and then take it from there...

Click to expand...

Fotar du småbild så skulle jag inte rekommendera Rodinal om du inte vill få extremt grovkorniga bilder med Tri-X. D-76 1+1 är utmärkt för denna film oavsett om man är amatör eller proffs.

(I wouldn't recommend Rodinal if you are shooting small format, if you don't want extremely big grain with Tri-X. D-76 1+1 is excellent for this film, for amateurs or professionals alike).

I would also back the advice to use what you used in the past. Introduce as few variables as you possibly can.

Rodinal is an interesting developer that you could try a couple of hundred rolls down the road, once you fully understand the Tri-X/D76 combination and its potential.

Rodinal can give you very sharp, acute, and moderately fine grain with Tri-X, even from 35mm, if you treat it right, watch your temperatures VERY carefully, and just take care with the whole process. But its strength should definitely not be measured in grain - it is a VERY powerful developer that will let you build contrast and texture in your negatives that few other developers can.

But please do yourself a favor and explore the full potential of D76 before you look anywhere else. Technique has more to do with your results than your materials. A LOT more.

Lycka till!

- Thomas

XTOL full strength. Replenish with 70ml of stock. It will give a slight speed boost, great contrast, and fine grain.

Steve

Hi Mattias and welcome to APUG.

you can also try parodinal as it´s simple to make and more economic, or maybe caffenol-c, stop bath is really unecessary, just wash for 1 min in water or 5 water changes with agitation and for fixer you can make your own rapid fixer in a really fast way, just use 1 liter of water at around 40-50ºc plus 4 tablespoons of sodium thiosulfate, 1 tablespoon of ammonium chloride, and 1 tablespoon of sodium sulfite, for 5-6 minutes, and that´s it, wash, wetting agent and dry

cheap and fast

Tri-X and D-76 were made for each other. Don't even bother with another film / dev combo until you've mastered this one.

Hi Mattias !
I fully agree with the D-76 gang, but it is also a question of what is available in photostores. I don't know about the Stockholm area, but here in Göteborg we have a shop , Fotokompaniet , that specialises in analog photography. For mail order within Sweden you have PHOTAX with a very good selection of most analog products. If you feel comfortable with international mail order, there is also Fotoimpex in Berlin and Silverprint in London. Tri-X and D-76 ( or XTOL ) is a combination as good as owen baked cod filet here from the west coast and a good Chablis wine. Try both but wait with the wine untill the film is hanging to dry. Lycka till !! ( Good luck !! )

Karl-Gustaf

http://www.fotokompaniet.com/
http://www.photax.se/
http://www.silverprint.co.uk/
http://www.fotoimpex.de/

K-G said:

it is also a question of what is available in photostores.

Click to expand...

But just about every maker of darkroom chemicals makes a version of D-76. It is usually obvious from the name it is a D-76 clone: "Arista 76", "Clayton DC76", "Legacy Pro L-76". Sometimes these are variations of D-76 using ascorbic acid or phenidone - the name doesn't always warn one, such as "Clayton F76". When in doubt, look at the MSDS: it will give you the major ingredients.

I had a bad experience with Xtol and its sudden death a few years ago and cannot bring myself to trust it. I have never really liked D-76 either.

I would recommend HC-110 for easy to print negatives. Just dilute the concentrate directly and avoid making a stock solution. Every darkroom should have a 10 and a 25 ml graduate. The concentrate seems to keep forever even in opened bottles.

Gerald C Koch said:

I had a bad experience with Xtol and its sudden death a few years ago and cannot bring myself to trust it. I have never really liked D-76 either.

Click to expand...

The sudden death think has been taken care of. I have had XTOL last more than 2 years.

Steve

No disrespect meant, but I'm pretty sure that the OP didn't ask for what you like and don't like, but what works - objectively. Many photographers have had really great results with both D76 and Xtol, so there's no reason to write either of them off just because you don't like them.

And Xtol's sudden death syndrome has been taken care of, so it can be trusted just fine.

Gerald C Koch said:

I had a bad experience with Xtol and its sudden death a few years ago and cannot bring myself to trust it. I have never really liked D-76 either.

I would recommend HC-110 for easy to print negatives. Just dilute the concentrate directly and avoid making a stock solution. Every darkroom should have a 10 and a 25 ml graduate. The concentrate seems to keep forever even in opened bottles.

Click to expand...

Thomas Bertilsson said:

No disrespect meant, but I'm pretty sure that the OP didn't ask for what you like and don't like, but what works - objectively.

Click to expand...

No disrespect -- but on a forum like APUG what one is going to get are subjective comments. If one wants really objective advice one needs to seak elsewhere perhaps on a more technical site. All of photography is highly subjective!

I don't agree with you. It is possible to offer objective advice.

Offering your opinion of what developers you like and don't like is not going to help the OP.

Subjective - that's a problem. Especially when learning a process. You need objectivity when you do that - that's how a good teacher operates; they know how to look beyond their own frame of reference, realizing that what the student needs is to learn by understanding it in a way that works for them. To all of a sudden introduce variables to that process, such as a new developer while learning a system that works for film photography, is counter productive. What truly matters is technique. I dare say that millions of photographers used D76, Xtol, or HC-110 quite successfully. That qualifies all of those developers. It's a matter of learning HOW to work with them that truly matters, and the best suggestion for that is to encourage users to keep using what they are used to, and make it work.

I don't want the OP to make the mistake I made - I used a lot of different films and developers for a long time, and never really learned ANY of them. My pictures were mediocre. After I settled on a single emulsion and a single developer, my work grew more in one year than it did in the previous eight.

Now I know my materials so well that I can just react when pictures come to me. I don't have to think about the process at all. That is true freedom in photography - to be so confident about your process and materials that you just instantaneously know what to do when a picture presents itself.

I hope that helps in explaining how I try to help people to work with their technique rather than their materials.

- Thomas

Gerald C Koch said:

No disrespect -- but on a forum like APUG what one is going to get are subjective comments. If one wants really objective advice one needs to seak elsewhere perhaps on a more technical site. All of photography is highly subjective!

Click to expand...

Gerald C Koch said:

No disrespect -- but on a forum like APUG what one is going to get are subjective comments. If one wants really objective advice one needs to seak elsewhere perhaps on a more technical site. All of photography is highly subjective!

Click to expand...

Is this subjective??
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...wFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

I would say it is objective.

You had one bad experience with XTOL and you will not use it again. That sounds a lot like subjective. Anyone can have a bad experience with any developer.

One last comment: My opinions are objective; yours are subjective.

Steve

that kodak graph besides being non objective is highly partial and incorrect, at least for old emulsion technology emulsions like foma.