Plus-X

[Ektagraphic]

I have seen some great results from Plus-X in the past but some of mine seem flat sometimes. (Maybe this is just Plus-X) It seems hard to describe. I wish I had means to show them....Anyway....What are the ideal developers for Plus-X? I have been using D-76 for everything but I just ordered some HC-110. Could you guys please post some photos up here that you have taken with Plus-X and if you remember could you post the developer. For some reason I feel like I like Plus-X but can't seem to get it right myself. I'll keep working at it. I plan to make some prints tomorrow off of 5 rolls of it I have shot. I'll let you you know my thoughts after that. Thanks in advance for your help. Patrick

 

[GraemeMitchell]

PX in HC-110 (w/ a filter, either red or yellow): http://graememitchell.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/35mm_fashion_aug08.jpg

PX in D-76: http://graememitchell.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/70.jpg and http://graememitchell.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/spec_1_la_028.jpg

it's an excellent film, strangely overlooked by most

 

[Ektagraphic]

I know that I am working with darkroom prints but after flipping through a bunch of scans on flickr I think I have a better understanding of the characteristics and they are similar to what I am seeing. I think I have a new appreaciation for this film. It seems very smooth compared to all of my Tri-X shots. Nice.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Thanks for sharing. That is another thing I wanted to mention. I want to try some red, green and yellow filters......

 

[bdial]

Most of my black and whites in the gallery are Plus-X, and much of it was processed in D-76, if that helps.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Plus-X works very well in D-76 1:1

 

[naugastyle]

It's my favorite film, closely tied to Tri-x. I think of it as a finer-grained slower Tri-x, really.

I usually develop in D76 but I've been using R09 more lately, especially if I have APX 100 to develop because they use the same time.

Here are mine:http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=plusx&w=10039214@N07. Mostly scans but some of the recent posts are prints. Not really sure how much you can see of the film's character from the scan of a toned 5x7 print though.

 

[fschifano]

If you're getting flat negatives, then something is wrong because Plus-X is anything but flat looking when it is exposed and developed properly. There's not much better than using either D-76 or XTOL either. HC-110 is ok, but I don't see any advantage to using it over D-76. If anything HC-110 can make it a bit too contrasty. Development times are short for Dilution B, making it too easy to overdevelop the film if your temps are a little warm and/or your timing is a little off.

 

[DWThomas]

In HC110 1+63 ("H")
we have:
Lyons Fall Fiddle festival
Top of this page

And a few in straight D76

While the above are admittedly negative scans, I don't get carried away with tweaking scans and have generally been able to get similar results on paper. I did a print of the '39 Farmall on the Fiddle Fest page that looked extremely like that. Would have entered it in a competition but decided I didn't like the feet showing behind it -- wish I'd asked the guy to move!

 

[David William White]

Almost all of my Photo of the Day stuff is shot with Eastman 5231 Plus-X in D-76 straight. It's surely the same emulsion. I rate at 100 and process for 6 minutes. 7 minutes if I'm printing on grade 1 paper (which I have a lot of).

 

[Ektagraphic]

XTOL....That is another to try. I have a feeling I'll keep it on D-76

 

[fschifano]

If you like D-76, then you'll like XTOL better. Over all it looks about the same, but with slightly better speed (around 1/3 stop) and slightly less grain (about 10%). The really cool thing about this is that the highlights won't blow out with normal exposure and development, so you don't need to factor it in. When you go to make a print, you have more information on the negative that you can use or not.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I'll give it a try. Does the paper developer also make a big diffrence?

 

[fschifano]

Depends on the paper. Some papers are responsive to different developers. Some behave about the same no matter what you use for a developer.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have been using ILFORD RC and VC Multigrade papers....I would like to try the ADOX since it is based off the Agfa emulsion which appears was very popular. For developer, I have used Dektol and I have been very happy with the ILFORD/Dektol combo.

 

[nickrapak]

Plus-X is a very finicky film. Underexposure makes it look flat in an instant, but when you get it right, it just shines. In other than bright daylight, I shoot it at 100 and develop in D-76 1:1 for Kodak's posted times.

I have shot a lot of rolls of Plus-X, and I have to say that it is one of my two favorite B&W films, along with APX 100. I have gotten more of my best shots on Plus-X than any other film, but I have also gotten a lot of flat images before I learned to overexpose a little.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I am thinking underexposure has been my problem after looking at my negs having some of them being dark....I was thinking of shooting it at 100 and I'll try that next time I shoot some.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Is APX 100 still available?

 

[nickrapak]

Is APX 100 still available?

Yes and no. It has been discontinued, but Agfa made so much of it before they shut down that a lot of places still have stock (or the equivalent Rollei Retro 100).

 

[IloveTLRs]

I've seen and used it here in Japan - both APX 100 and 400. Very nice film, I got pretty good grain (read=lots) with HC-110. I use HC-110 like mayonnaise though: I dip everything in it

Plus-X has disappeared from the shelves of my local photo places. Kodak told me that Plus-X would no longer be on sale here in Japan from 1/2010 Anyone in Tokyo or anywhere else still see it?

 

[jordanstarr]

I've stockpiled Plus-x, anticipating it's discontinuity any day now as it's my favorite 100 speed film (125 to be exact -before people correct me!). I use pyrocat-HD, but have been considering switching back to Xtol. D-76 is fine, but x-tol is much better in my opinion. It produces high contrast negatives, but the photos just jump off the paper when you make darkroom prints on fibre (a lower contrast paper that picks up details).

 

[clayne]

What a crime to dip APX in HC-110. You need to try it in Rodinal.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Well, I plan to start using a lot more Plus-X next to my Tri-X. I seem to be quite partial to the films that have been around a while. I have a couple of 35mm negs on Plus-X that are from 1957 and I have printed them and they look remarkably similar to the current Plus-X.....I guess that even through the Kodak manufacturing changes which made developing times diffrent, the look of the Plus-X did not change at all.....I really hope it doesn't go away soon.....