Pushing Tri-X 400 to 1600 with DDX?

[slitherjef]

I want to do some low light indoor shots and all I have is some tri-x 400. I was going to grab some neopan 1600 but they did not have the stuff. Would have grabbed some Delta 3200 (which I wanted to try anyway) but that would have left me with less money to spend on frames so I just ended up getting 3 rolls of tri-x.

So if I was to push this stuff 2 stops in DDX (can't even find times for it) would it even work? Or should I just hold off on my messing around until I can get some faster film?

 

[eddym]

I want to do some low light indoor shots and all I have is some tri-x 400. I was going to grab some neopan 1600 but they did not have the stuff. Would have grabbed some Delta 3200 (which I wanted to try anyway) but that would have left me with less money to spend on frames so I just ended up getting 3 rolls of tri-x.

So if I was to push this stuff 2 stops in DDX (can't even find times for it) would it even work? Or should I just hold off on my messing around until I can get some faster film?

Though DD-X would not be my first choice for pushing Tri-X (I'd use HC110), you can certainly use it. Ilford lists the times for 1600 as 14:00 minutes at 68F/20C, and 11:00 minutes at 75F/24C.

You really should try some Delta 3200 if you're really into low light work, though. It's wonderful stuff.

--Eddy

 

[df cardwell]

Funny how we have different tastes. I gave up on pushing in HC110 in 1968, but whatever we use to make good pictures is perfect. And Eddy's are fine.

But I think DD / DDX is great. 14 is a good place to start.

Good luck.

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

I see on the Massive Developer Chart on my Palm Pilot that TriX in Ilfotec DD-X is (1+4) 14min 20º C for ISO 1600.

I have used TMX400 at ISO 1600 with DD-X, and found I liked the results better than using Ilford Delta 3200 at ISO 1600 processed in DD-X. However, the differences are subtle.

Ciao!

Gordon

 

[Roger Hicks]

True ISO of Tri-X in DDX = 650-800 so it's only a one-stop push, or at most one and a half. Ilford's own recommendation is 14 minutes at 20C or 11 at 24C and the best bet is probably to process one roll at that and make changes later as needed. I'd certainly choose DD-X over HC110 but we're back to alchemy here: what works for you, works for you.

Of course if you find you habitually need more or less time (because of metering methods, equipmennt variations, etc.) make an adjustment accordingly; I'd probably start at 12 minutes at 24. Actually I wouldn't because I'd use Delta 3200 (true ISO in DD-X around 1250) but then I'd rate it at 3200 anyway...

Obviously if you want shadow detail you'd be better off with the Delta 3200 but on the bright side the grain of the Tri-X will be smaller.

True ISO of Neopan 1600 is only about 1/3 stop higher than Tri-X but it does push better. Then again, I find that HP5 pushes better than Tri-X; others will say the exact opposite.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com -- you might want to have a look at the free module on ISO speeds in The Photo School on the site)

 

[eddym]

Of course if you find you habitually need more or less time (because of metering methods, equipmennt variations, etc.) make an adjustment accordingly; I'd probably start at 12 minutes at 24. Actually I wouldn't because I'd use Delta 3200 (true ISO in DD-X around 1250) but then I'd rate it at 3200 anyway...

Roger, what times do you use for Delta 3200 at 3200? I've been using 9:30 at 68F, but lately the negs have looked thin.

--Eddy

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Eddy,

I'd try 11 if I were you.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Harry Lime]

DD-X will work just fine. Like XTOL it gives full speed and is very good at push processing.
I've pushed Tri-X to 800 and 1200 in DD-X and it worked just fine.

My choice would be Delta3200@1600 in DD-X (more shadow detail), but if all you have at hand is Tri-X, than Tri-X it is!