Classic Combo: Tri-X & Rodinal

[KenR]

TriX320

Are you sure you want to use TriX320? It is a different film than TriX400 and is said to be optimized for the studio and not the field - doesn't handle flare and contrast as well from what I read.

 

[tob]

The correct reference is: Darkroom, Eleanor Lewis (Editor), Lustrum Press, 1977, p. 63-75.

Best,
Tobias

I don't see anything about Ralph Gibson in my version of this book. Anyone have the correct reference?
Thanks

 

[George Collier]

To Don C -
Thanks for your elaboration on Rodinal properties and techniques. I will try your suggestion. When I post the results, I will start a new thread, no need to continue hijacking this one.

 

[Rolfe Tessem]

Are you sure you want to use TriX320? It is a different film than TriX400 and is said to be optimized for the studio and not the field - doesn't handle flare and contrast as well from what I read.

I have to agree with this -- unless you working in the studio with controlled lighting, you probably don't want TXP, you want regular TX 400.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I'm about to have a really, really large (and unscientific) test of Tri-X in Rodinal in both 1:100 and 1:50. I'll let you know when I've finally completed it.

 

[fotod69]

TX400 vs 320

Are you sure you want to use TriX320? It is a different film than TriX400 and is said to be optimized for the studio and not the field - doesn't handle flare and contrast as well from what I read.

I performed a side by side comparison of both TX400 and 320. I have 2 Rollei twins which are matched. I rated both at half ISO and developed in Rodinal 1:50. I found the TX 400 to have slightly higher local contrast and it seemed to have more "character" to the grain. I found therefore that the 320 film has the characteristics of 400 but slightly less so. I have only performed this test in the field and not the studio. TX400 is now the only medium speed film I shoot with the Rollei and love the results expecially in large (20x20) prints. Good luck.
Dennis

 

[theyankeesnapper]

"I've decided to get myself the 120 format new Tri-X 320 to give
the photos the bite they need."

//////////////////////////////////////////////

I'm assuming that you mean 320TXP rather than 400TX. Unless I needed 220 or was shooting in a studio the 320TX would be best. Out of doors, I would want to use the 400TX because of its shoulder and toe and push
capabilities. If I had already purchased the film, I wouldn't worry too much, both films are excellent with the TXP having slightly finer grain

Bob

 

[arigram]

I tried the 120 TriX 320 with Rodinal (1-50) on the Jobo the other day.
I did -not- like the results. The grain was too much and they looked muddy.
Unless I am doing something wrong to compensate for the continuous rotation,
I will probably won't do this combo again.

 

[Petzi]

Ha! I didn't know that Salgado was a Kodak devotee...

I think he uses Tri-X 320 because it is the only b/w film that comes in 220 rolls.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think Salgado uses Tri-X, because it looks great, and his style is very much connected to that look. I know he doesn't print them himself, but I just saw a few original Salgado prints at the Chicago Art Institute, which is running a show right now on photography and politics, and they've got that really recognizable muscular Tri-X feeling of line.

Tri-X is about line, and HP-5 is about gradation--both nice films, but it's an aesthetic choice.

 

[Gerald Koch]

Now to try the opposite end: PanF+ and Perceptol.

Not a very good combination. PanF+ is already a fine grain film and you will destroy any fine detail by developing it in a solvent style developer like Perceptol. Of course, you could dilute the Perceptol 1+3 but what would be the point. Since you're already using Rodinal use it for the PanF+. You'll get really sharp images with lots of detail.

 

[mcgrattan]

There was a thread on another site about Salgado and one of the guys who prints for him commented.

His shots, these days, are on TXP320 but they are developed in Calbe A49 (aka Adox ATM49) not Rodinal.

Calbe A49/Adox ATM49 is, for me, a great developer and well worth a try.

 

[George Collier]

Ari - Regarding the grain and muddy-ness of the Jobo negs - remember Don Cardwell's comment early in this thread - less agitation leads to less grain. I am also exploring the combination of 120 Tri-x (400) and Rodinal in a Kinderman tank. I think my final recipe is probably 1:50, 70 - 72F, 15 - 18 minutes with minimal agitation, hopefully none after the first 10-15 seconds. Also no presoak. This is my next test.

 

[Petzi]

I think Salgado uses Tri-X, because it looks great, and his style is very much connected to that look.

I don't think so because he is one of the most prominent supporters of the 220 petition which is directed mainly at Ilford and Fuji...

 

[theyankeesnapper]

I tried the 120 TriX 320 with Rodinal (1-50) on the Jobo the other day.
I did -not- like the results. The grain was too much and they looked muddy.
Unless I am doing something wrong to compensate for the continuous rotation,
I will probably won't do this combo again.

/////////////////////////////////

It may have been the agitation, when using Rodinal I never use my Jobo/CPA, always by hand.

Give it another try using 400TX, in a small tank of around 500ml with 10ml of Rodinal and 500ml of water. What ever tank I use, I keep it full and always use 10 ml of developer per roll of film. Shoot it at iso 250, develop for about 15minutes @ 20c. for portraits, agitate gently for 10 seconds the first minute and 5 seconds each additional minute. For normal subjects agitate the way you normally would. As a matter of fact if your shooting portraits use the 1:85 dilution and start at 16 minutes. These times and temps are for 400TX120, I don't shoot TXP and I would suspect that the above times would have to be increased a bit for TXP.

I've read that Patrick Gainer has reported that the addition of 4 grams of Sodium Ascorbate powder not Ascorbic Acid added to One (1) liter of prepared Rodinal gives us finer grain. I'm going to try this out for myself this coming weekend using 400TX120 I'll let you know what happened next Monday.

Regards.

Bob McCarthy
theyankeesnapper@aol.com

 

[argus]

I tried the 120 TriX 320 with Rodinal (1-50) on the Jobo the other day.
I did -not- like the results. The grain was too much and they looked muddy.
Unless I am doing something wrong to compensate for the continuous rotation,
I will probably won't do this combo again.

Arigram,

it's not the film+developer combo but Rodinal+JOBO that's wrong.
Rodinal should be handled like a fine French lady: with care.

Agitate gentle and all will be OK.

G

 

[Gerald Koch]

I've read that Patrick Gainer has reported that the addition of 4 grams of Sodium Ascorbate powder not Ascorbic Acid added to One (1) liter of prepared Rodinal gives us finer grain. I'm going to try this out for myself this coming weekend using 400TX120 I'll let you know what happened next Monday.

You are adding another developing agent to the Rodinal and changing its activity. You may experience different developing times.

 

[Earl Dunbar]

As arigam stated, DON'T AGITATE SO FREAKIN' MUCH!!!

I believe (but it is a belief, as I have not done extensive testing) that less agressive agitation with all developers is beneficial. Certainly with higher acutance developers this is important.

 

[meltronic]

Ari, I can't comment on your film/developer choice, but I like your idea for the project. This is similar to what I'm doing in Osaka now, except that I'm not limiting to only old shopkeepers, but anyone doing a job. Are you shooting candids, or asking for permission? I have to stick with my old Kowa SIX though. I'm not a rich Greek.

 

[arigram]

Ari, I can't comment on your film/developer choice, but I like your idea for the project. This is similar to what I'm doing in Osaka now, except that I'm not limiting to only old shopkeepers, but anyone doing a job. Are you shooting candids, or asking for permission? I have to stick with my old Kowa SIX though. I'm not a rich Greek.

Oh, to tell you the truth I have not started the project "officially" and shoot more or less anything I find, with permission or not.
As for being rich, I am definately not!
I traded my soul for the Hasselblad! I did a deal with the gov...

Since I am using the Jobo now to develop the film I will shy away from Rodinal at the moment and give other developers a try. I am making a big order of film which includes only Ilford, so I wil now give HP5+ and Ilfosol-S or D-76 a shot.

 

[blokeman]

Classic combo: tri-X and Rodinal

... as a long time Rodinal user I thought I'd write in my 99c worth, maybe it'll help someone. Unfortunately I can no longer source the old TX 400 here in Australia, but when I did use it I had fantastic results & here are the methods I used:
rated at 400, developed 1:50 15 minutes at 20 deg, agitate 10 sec each minute until 5 minutes then each 2 minutes, gently. I had what appears to be exactly the same results when I diluted at 1:100 >>> around 20-21 minutes. Great shadow detail with both of these dilutions. 1:50 had a little more pazazz (for me).
I've been using the newer TXP 320 for a few months but I think I'm going to drop it, I've tried everything & I still get what I describe as mushy and muddy looking results. I've been rating at packet speed... 320 and developing for 17-18 minutes and 1:50. Negs 'look' OK but are not printing well. I use graded paper.
Someone mentioned FP4/Rodinal in this thread, I might give this a trial as soon as my TXP320 runs out. There has been a lot of discussion about the new Tri-X & from my experience, it's not as good as the old Tri-X, plain & simple. I'd use Ilford Delta 400 if it wasn't SO expensive here & came in a pack with more than 25!

 

[John Bragg]

Hi Blokeman,
Try 400TX If you can get it, as this (and not TXP 320), is the direct replacement for TX400...... I have used it for a nearly 3 years and just started using Rodinal 1:50. My data for This is 9mins 20c rated 200 asa. Agitate 30secs continuous, then 2 gentle inversions at start of each subsequent minute. (this is for condensor enlarger). Amazing tones , and sharp enough to shave with !!!!!!
Regards J.B.

 

[f1.4]

Since you are moving out of D-76 to find something new, you might make a comparison between TriX in Rodinal 1+50 and Tri-X in XTOL 1+1 before going into the project in earnest. In my view, XTOL is D-76 with added sharpness, - and with somewhat less grain than Rodinal. Both changes your film speed, so you have to do some testing first anyway.
The less you agitate during development, the sharper negatives you will get.
I use XTOL 1+1 as a once only developer. Not as economical as one shot Rodinal, but the gray-tones are great. No big science proof behind this; but it seems that XTOL needs 24 hours of "settling" after mixing before it is used. Have fun.

 

[fotod69]

Are you sure you want to use TriX320? It is a different film than TriX400 and is said to be optimized for the studio and not the field - doesn't handle flare and contrast as well from what I read.

Being a photographer that loves the Tri-x and Rodinal combination I performed a comparison between TX400 and TXP320 rateed at 200 and 160 respectively (from zone testing). I found I preffered the TX400 because the local contrast wah slightly higher and the grain had a bit more "character" which is a quality I love about medium format Tri-X. My tests were performed in natural daylight. My final developing time for TX400 normal (rated 200 using a spot meter) is 1:50 for 10min 15sec at 70 degrees with 30 seconds initial agitation with 5 sec every 30 sec. Anyway, good luck with it all. It's a great combination that really comes through in the prints.
Dennis

 

[jescande]

Ola,

I´m coming back from a long trip. I used only TriX (mainly with Leica 35 f2 Asph) and now comes the time to develop my 70 rolls. I have exposed at 200 400 800 and 1600 and wonder wich developer should I use.

I´ve read carefully different threds and still have a few questions :
- I would try Rodinal 1+50 (it seems that 1+100 won´t add any good and requires a longer time) for 200 and 400
- I would use Xtol (1+1) for 800 and 1600, as I´m afraid that the grain with rodinal @ 800 or 1600 would be too obvious
- I like the work of Ralph Gibson in the Leica brochure (pictures of people working in the factory), but wonder if this grainy look will fit a landscape ... So maybe for some of the 200 or 400 I could use Xtol. Is there any big difference on how the grain appears with rodinal and Xtol ?
- I´ve read that enlargement (30x40 cm) are not so good from film developped with Rodinal (grain too obvious). Does anyone have example ?
- isn´t it strange to use a TriX and then try to minimise grain using emofin for example ?
- what is the effect of the fixer on the grain/sharpness ?

Thanks for your help.