Tri-X 400 @ 200... Why?

[Sirius Glass]

I still shoot all films at box speed and when I choose I use the Zone System based on the box speed. The best of both worlds.

 

[ic-racer]

ISO hasn’t changed since 2007, but maybe Tri-x has.
I don’t use it much so can’t say.
Do know my EI for it has as much relevance in someone else’s darkroom as knowing my usual print time for a 11x14 is around 12 seconds.

 

[MattKing]

I hope the APUG gods don’t smite me for my transgression

They've worked out an accommodation with the rest of the world - it is called Photrio.
And I think I remember that 2010 image.
By George, I do!
https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/hair-cut.28600/

 

[Rolleiflexible]

They've worked out an accommodation with the rest of the world - it is called Photrio.
And I think I remember that 2010 image.
By George, I do!
https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/hair-cut.28600/

I forgot it was in the gallery here! As you can see, the Kallitype is a bit flat. I was about to post a question about that -- is it better in a hybrid process to increase contrast by adding dichromate to the sensitizer, or simply to increase contrast in the file before printing the negative? But there are so many divisions in the new site -- a lot of the learning is over in the analog side, but the digital negative is on the hybrid side. And then in the hybrid side, does my question go into the Digital Negatives forum, or in the Hand Coated Wet Prints forum? I know there is purpose in all of these divisions, but the topic doesn't divide so neatly. :-(

 

[MattKing]

I'd post it in the Digital Negatives sub-forum. The practitioners who post there work with the vagaries of both the digital negative procedure, and the vagaries of the various processes.
The Hand Coated Wet Prints sub-forum is primarily for those who do things the old way - with large film negatives.
You don't have to worry a lot about posting in either one, because those who work in those areas will most likely see the new activity in either sub-forum. There are very few practitioners in the alternative processes who don't have some familiarity now with the Digital Negatives crowd.
My sense is that the answer about where to make the adjustment is that you should do so in the negative.

 

[Rick Jones]

Another factor can be the type of enlarger used. Some printing with a condenser enlarger find that reduced development time to control the higher resulting contrast leads them to a lower EI. Those printing with a diffusion system may find box speed and development times closer to Kodak's suggestions work just fine.

 

[Bill Burk]

Some different ideas recently floated about using EI 200 for 400 film. There is the positively better image quality that you get by giving greater than minimum exposure for the film and then correspondingly reducing contrast in development. Then printing on a Condenser enlarger. Think of it as “The Leica Way”. (daylight 1/200 f/16)

Then there’s the “I like better shadow detail” idea. For that approach you do not decrease development and you use a Diffusion enlarger. In this approach you slightly degrade image quality, like graininess and resolution (compared with correct exposure), in exchange you get your detail in shadows and a little safety factor. (daylight 1/200 f/16)

Then there’s the Zone System where the difference from Zone V to Zone I is four stops so the way speed is rated differs. Here you are trying to give the correct exposure but the measurement of speed is done differently. (daylight 1/400 f/16).

Or you can expose the film correctly (daylight 1/400 f/16)

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Or you can expose the film correctly (daylight 1/400 f/16)

That's your correct way. If you feel comfort following an ISO committee and you are certain that your methods of metering and exposing and developing line up with the standard, then that's a great thing. For you.

It doesn't help new shooters to be left with an erroneous belief that there is some normative value to the box rating of the film. In the end, go shoot a roll at the box speed, using whatever meter you use. Develop it as you've been taught. If the shadows are black, then you need to put more light on the film. Simple as that -- there's no shame at departing from the box speed, if it's not giving you the result you need.

 

[MattKing]

I don't think Bill is trolling the forum.
I think he is trying to poke fun at the myths that swirl around film exposure though.
He might consider using a few more emoticons.

 

[Stats]

I rate TriX at 200 when I'm metering with my Gossen Luna Pro and Pentax meters. When using the Nikon photomic camera meter, I rate TriX at 400. I get exactly the same exposure for all of them. You must test your own equipment to determine what will work for you.

 

[Bill Burk]

Ah that’s better

Let me say it another way.

To the beginner: You can get a wealth of advice here and it may be overwhelming. Especially the advice that contradicts. @Rolleiflexible is a knowledgeable expert you can trust. The advice to adjust according to results is classic.

To the expert who wants to understand the half box speed thing: When you use the Zone System and find a 400 speed film has a personal exposure index of 200, you have found the exact same thing the manufacturer found. That film, when developed to the right contrast for printing on Grade 2, will have a density of 0.1 above filmbase plus fog when it has received 0.002 meter candle seconds of light.

The exact same exposure, the exact same result, two different EI ratings

 

[Bill Burk]

The exact same exposure, the exact same result, two different EI ratings

Actually not exactly but now if you care to chip away there is 1/3 stop difference remaining. It’s enough for me to accept that this last third stop is accounted for by the slightly less development for Zone System “N” which naturally means it takes a little more light hitting the film to make it reach 0.1 density.

But the film’s not slower because you developed it less. The speed of the film hasn’t changed.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Not a film that I used a lot, but it was the first LF film I tried when I got into LF photography. Like all black and white films that I use I have to get those shadows high up on the curve, otherwise they're a bit flat for my liking...hence EI 200-250.

 

[gone]

You can go the other way too. I shot a roll of Tri X at EI 800 the other day for the first time. Developed in Rodinal at 1:20, it gets pretty gritty. I like it for some subjects, doesn't work for others.

The grain is amazing in 35mm. No real shadow detail, highlights are kinda blown out, looks almost like lith film. Or maybe Tri X from the 50's.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Ah that’s better

Let me say it another way.

To the beginner: You can get a wealth of advice here and it may be overwhelming. Especially the advice that contradicts. @Rolleiflexible is a knowledgeable expert you can trust. The advice to adjust according to results is classic.

Holy cow. Nobody ever accused me of being an expert before. What did I do wrong?

 

[john_s]

Or you can just set your meter on box speed and learn to meter in such a way that you get the results you want. Think "placement" but not the whole Zone System routine.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Or you can just set your meter on box speed and learn to meter in such a way that you get the results you want. Think "placement" but not the whole Zone System routine.

As I posted in Post #51

​

I still shoot all films at box speed and when I choose I use the Zone System based on the box speed. The best of both worlds.​

 

[Huss]

As I posted in Post #51

​

As I posted in Post #68

I still shoot all films at box speed and when I choose I use the Zone System based on the box speed. The best of both worlds.

 

[Bill Burk]

Holy cow. Nobody ever accused me of being an expert before. What did I do wrong?

You showed some great pictures and said something that made perfect sense.

 

[Bill Burk]

We’ve talked about these points individually forever. But I don’t think the separate ideas have been assembled quite this way before. I’m really excited about this so I might repeat it in slightly different ways until it comes across clearly.

Box speed and Zone System speed (half box speed) both aim to put key black (not textured black) at 0.1 above filmbase plus fog. So if you want the key blacks to have the least exposure (usually the best exposure) set the camera to box speed. And set a spotmeter at half box speed (or your personal exposure index, if you worked that out). Use the camera normally at box speed and use the spotmeter to take Zone System readings at half box speed. Expect the f/stop and shutter speed to be the same either way. In reality, the readings differ but you get options.

If you like a little extra shadow detail (we talk about this a lot too), use half box speed in the camera.

Now think about what you should do if you really want extra shadow detail and you also use the Zone System. By my logic you should use quarter box speed. That’s not realistic. You can probably just use half box speed and place your shadows on a higher Zone.

 

[Stephen Benskin]

Zone System testing uses a different methodology. It recalibrates the relationship between the metered exposure point and speed point. From a Δ1.0 log-H to a Δ1.2 log-H. This accounts for the 2/3 stop difference in EI and when stopping down four stops for Zone I placement at 0.10 over Fb+f. Of course, Zone System doesn't factor in flare which will influence the results in actual use.

Rating at half the box speed as a rule of thumb gives an EI that is similar or no different than the older Fractional Gradient speed method. It's a good safety factor.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

It's a good safety factor.

Exactly. When I was shooting film, I was shooting people. Shadow detail means hair for most people -- underexpose even a quarter-stop and your subject is wearing a black helmet. And people move, and light changes. It's easy to underexpose by mistake, even if you have confidence in your meter and your processes. A tilt of the head is enough to goof the exposure.

There's no risk for erring in the other direction -- the extra stop isn't going to blow out highlights. (Not with Tri-X, anyway.)

For what I did, the Zone System was not terribly useful. If you're shooting landscapes or catalog work or still lifes, well, maybe the insurance isn't so important. I hesitate to draw general conclusions from my own experience.

History offers another approach: Journalists often shot Tri-X and developed it in Diafine (a developer created for pushing Tri-X) because it would give a printable image at just about every EI from 100 to 1200. Assuming a certain amount of ambient light, a shooter can set a shutter speed and aperture that suits her needs, and then forget about them and concentrate on focus and framing.

I never understood why Diafine didn't have more fans. For shooting some cameras, like Brownies or Holgas, it was indispensable.

 

[Jordanpereira1]

The tri-x, I much prefer to work in 200 Iso

 

[Jordanpereira1]

I find the grain even better

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Tri-X, I much prefer to work in 400 ISO and use the Zone System based on box speed when I want better shadow detail.