• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Return To D76 & Tri-X

gone

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
5,502
Location
gone
Format
Medium Format
Having tried Acufine and Rodinal recently and posted my results here (think I screwed up on the 1:50 Rodinal dilution, so will retry that at some other time), I mixed up a fresh batch of D76 yesterday and put my recently self-refurbished Canon FTb w/ FD 50 1.4 lens thru it today. All I can say is, D76, I missed ya! While I love the grain in Rodinal, and it's hard to beat Acufine's sharpness & cleanness, D76 and Tri-X really are perfect together. Also, this FD 50 1.4 chrome nose lens rocks. Who knew? Shot at box speed (200 w/ Y. filter)

D76 is all about the tones, to me anyway. I accidentally developed this full strength at the 1+1 times (9 1/2 minutes at 70 degrees) instead of the 6 1/2 minutes Kodak calls for. The photos look beautiful, which is another great thing about D76. It's hard to mess things up. Love this developer.









 
I like Ilford ID-11 Plus better. It's the same thing as D-76, but w/a sequestering agent that keeps the dissolved silver from replating itself back onto the film--cleaner look. Chip
 
chip j said:
I like Ilford ID-11 Plus better. It's the same thing as D-76, but w/a sequestering agent that keeps the dissolved silver from replating itself back onto the film--cleaner look.
Click to expand...

I used ID-11 Plus for a while around the time it was introduced in the US. But it was discontinued long ago.

Anyway, TX/D-76 is the staff of life. Long may it live!
 
I have a respect for TX and D-76, and have used it a good many times in the 43 years since the first time I bought my GAF tank. But once I tried Microdol 1:3, it was like moving from pouring ketchup on my steak and having it with A1 instead.
 
Oren Grad said:
I used ID-11 Plus for a while around the time it was introduced in the US. But it was discontinued long ago.

Anyway, TX/D-76 is the staff of life. Long may it live!
Click to expand...

My lab said the were using ID-11 plus when I started w/them some yrs back. I had no ida it was discontinued. I used lots of iit when I was shooting 100+ rolls during the spring & summer.
 
chip j said:
My lab said the were using ID-11 plus when I started w/them some yrs back. I had no ida it was discontinued. I used lots of iit when I was shooting 100+ rolls during the spring & summer.
Click to expand...

Evidently it was discontinued around 1995, as per this discussion list post from 1999:

ILFORD ID 11 Plus was discontinued about 4 years ago because it was found
that Cinnamic acid disulfide appeared to reduce the film speed of some new
technology films.

Dead Link Removed
 

If it was discontinued it was "FIXED" and reintroduced because it's still available....

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=28

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/215157-REG/Ilford_1960475_ID_11_Film_Developer.html
 
Oren Grad said:
The product you've linked is plain ID-11 which, like its close relative D-76, has been available since approximately forever. ID-11 Plus was a variant of ID-11 which had a silver sequestering agent added.
Click to expand...

Oh!!! I see, interesting history. Thanks for explaining.
 
If I was starting over in photography again I'd exclusively use Tri X and D76 and and save myself a lot of fannying about and wasted time. If the grain was too big for some 35mm stuff I'd use a Rolleiflex. Simples!

Mind you, I suppose I'd have nothing to write about on my blog then!

~
 
I certainly agree that in small format Tri-X rated at 200 or 250, light yellow filter, developed in D-76/ID-11 @ 1:1, is classic for general photography/street photos/environmental portraits.

You can waste so much time trying to make other combinations work.

XTOL will provide similar contrast, 1/3 increase in shadow detail with a 10% increase in enlargement. XTOL is more environmentally friendly. It will have a longer shelf life than D-76.

I agree with the last poster....compliment a 35mm with a Rollei TLR if you have a darkroom.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I first practiced photography in 1988 I ended up using D76 with Tri-X film. My dad helped me develop my first film.

For some reason I haven't used D76 much over the years, but recently I was given a few bags of it, so I decided to try it. With Tri-X and TMax 400 it has been absolutely wonderful so far. I plan on continuing to use it, due to its broad availability, and for the lovely results. The negatives print like a dream.

I've even experimented a bit with Thornton's two-bath for dummies, where you use your normal developer, like Xtol or D76, and develop for about two thirds of your normal developing time. Then you follow with a three minute bath in a solution of two heaped tea spoons sodium metaborate in one liter of water. Really great for controlling highlights and obtaining easy to print negatives. You retain most of the original D76 quality, but you 'even out' the tonality of lower and higher contrast frames a little bit.

Anyway, film and developer choice is an important piece of the equation, but it isn't nearly as important as what you do with it...
 
Film and developer certainly have an effect on the end result but I think the differences within materials from the same group are very slight. Any decent 400 ISO film souped in any fine grain developer will be largely indistinguishable from the other possible combinations. Similarly, most 100 ISO films in any accutance developer with tend to look the same. Not exactly the same but with subtleties that probably won't make any difference at the end of the day. However, there is obviously a big difference between a 100 ISO film in a fine grain dev and a 400 ISO film in an accutance dev.
 
Nice. You simply have D-76 dialed in to what you want and how you expose and develop Tri-X. The other developers are just as capable but your initial experiences were by chance not the results you were after There's no doubt with time and effort you can get them well dialed in and might like them as much or even better for some nuanced reason. I used to dislike HC-110 and wonder how the heck those like Adams used it so successfully. Well in time and with a lot of tweaking, luck, and work I've got it dialed in nicely with a few emulsions and it's now my favorite developer. Second is Rodinal for me, then D-76. I like them all but not for all emulsions or all situations or environments in which I shoot.
 
Thanks, folks. Now I know not only that ID-11 Plus was discontinued, but why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register