Hey guys, "OP" here. As I mentioned in my last post, I decided to load up another roll of this Tri-X Pan and shoot it. So I did, yesterday. Developed it in D-76 yesterday too. 20C for 9 minutes, according to the inside of the Tri-X Pan box. And yes, Agulliver, I agitated it every 30 seconds. I was taught to do it this way many years ago, and that's the way I've always done it. But this time, instead of inversions, I decided to try spinning it gently, using the spindle.
The results were troubling. The whole roll looks like it was either underexposed or underdeveloped. Probably the latter, I'm thinking. Maybe I should have inverted instead of spinning? This Tri-X Pan expired in 2004, and I don't know how it was stored before I acquired it a few years ago. I'm now almost certain it came with a Canon A-1 outfit I bought then. It was probably just left in the bag for 10 years.
Anyway, I have one more roll, and I think I'll increase development times with it by at least a minute. I had to do that with the Plus-X I had that expired in 1983, but which had been frozen for all the intervening years. Those negs were thin if I developed it at recommended times, but by increasing development time by about a minute, this added nicely to the negs' density.
I've examined this latest roll with a loop and the grain is pronounced with some of the negs, not so bad with others. And I agree with Agulliver, the grain looks almost electronic.
I'm still getting used to the way the Pentax MX meters scenes. I think at least part of the problem is having underexposed shots -- when I thought I was getting correct exposure according to the MX's meter. It's accurate, but its center-weighted metering pattern is probably what is fooling me. I was able to rescue some of the shots, thanks to Photoshop's excellent raw file converter, but I couldn't rescue all. Following are some of the latest results.
These first three were exposed properly, it appears. They still show grain when viewing at higher magnifications, but I don't find it objectionable. The fourth was somewhat underexposed, it appears, so I hit it pretty hard with the Curves function, a look I don't mind, to be honest.
A leaded window from the exterior, Pentax MX, Tokina 70-210/4-5.6 SD, Tri-X Pan
A leaded window from the interior, same exposure details as above.
Front Porch Scrollwork, same exposure details.
Cat on Driveway, hard contrast. Pentax MX, Tamron SP 24-48, Tri-X Pan