Tri-x 400

Peter Schrager

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
4,203
Location
fairfield co
Format
Large Format
found some old proof sheets that I made years ago with this film. liked the tonality of the prints. I'm supposing that I developed with HC100 sol B-because that's all I knew then. is anyone using this film and what developer is your preferred mix??
Thanks, Peter
 

mjs

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
1,123
Location
Elkhart, Ind
Format
Multi Format
I use Tri-X in 35mm and 120 format, although I don't shoot as much of that as I used to (mostly 8x10 these days, on Foma film.) I've always liked Tri-X and for the same reason as you: I like the tonality. I process it in D-76, either straight or 1:1, depending on how hot the highlights were.

My younger daughter took a film photography class in college this summer and gave me a few rolls she had left at the end. Whoopie!

mjs
 

waynecrider

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
2,580
Location
Georgia
Format
35mm
Hey Peter; I'd say just develop it as you use to do and take a look at some results. There's just too many opinions as to what is better and to tell the truth I didn't see a whole lot of difference between my using D76 and Xtol, (in small format) but at least Xtol is somewhat less toxic.

You using it in 4x5? What about Pyrocat version whatever.
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Peter, I have used a lot of Tri-X 400 for both Holga, Rolleiflex, 4x5 (yes, the ISO 400 version), and 35mm. All of them are developed in Pyrocat-HD or MC (without discernible difference in printing). Semistand at 1+1+100 and 70*F.
I love this combination and would continue to use it if it wasn't for the cost of the film. I like Neopan 400 almost as much. It's kind of like the Tri-X but with less grain, for better or worse.
- Thomas
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
i have been processing tri x in
sprint film developer, which is
kinda-sorta like a d76 clone.
it is a liquid and mixes 1:9.
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Here's some current 400TX (35mm) in Acufine--

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I'm still working through the last of my old TX 400/120 from the freezer--less than 10 rolls left--but I usually soup it in Acufine or PMK. I haven't tried PMK with the New 400TX.
 
OP
OP

Peter Schrager

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
4,203
Location
fairfield co
Format
Large Format
thanks everyone!!

thanks to all of you. I think I'll run some tests ala pyrocat-mc vs hc100 vs good ol' xtol. reasons:I can make the pyrocat and the other two last forever..(xtol if capped off correctly).
I do have some ddx lying around also....
Thanks again,
Peter
David-seems you have a lot of time on your hands-just slipped that baby right by me!! congrats to you!!!
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Thanks Peter. Melchi keeps us pretty busy, but I can grab a few moments here and there for other things.
 

jovo

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
4,120
Location
Jacksonville
Format
Multi Format
Despite the complaining about the UK B&W magazine being too digi oriented on that thread, the September issue's Mike Johnston article is about using D76 rather than HC 110 dilution B. He says that the preference for the latter stemmed from it having been recommended by AA. Since Tri-x isn't the same film that it was when Ansel was using it, people who aren't aware of that aren't getting the results they expect to get. He also commented that it's much too active a developer for Tri-X and the D76 is a far better choice.

OBTW, Hi Peter! Nice to see you here again after a while.
 

bjorke

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,263
Location
SF sometimes
Format
Multi Format
My prediction: the very last snip of B&W film that Kodak ever makes, some misty day in the future, will be Tri-X.
 

fhovie

Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2003
Messages
1,250
Location
Powell Wyoming
Format
Large Format
I agree - and if it were the only film, I could easily make do with it. Although I use mostly FP4 now in 4x5 - love the contrast.

bjorke said:
My prediction: the very last snip of B&W film that Kodak ever makes, some misty day in the future, will be Tri-X.
Click to expand...
 

Anscojohn

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
2,704
Format
Medium Format

*****
The old Tri-X with HC110 Dil B gave great results. Neither the film nor the developer are now the same, I am told.

If you insist on shooting "modern" Tri-X and like good gradations with no headaches, hassles, nor staining, develop it in straight D23, ca. 8 min 68 deg F.

John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
 

pschauss

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2002
Messages
244
I get good results with new Tri-X in HC110 dilution H (half of dilution B). I develop for 11 minutes at 68 degrees C.
 

Attachments

  • FishingBoat.jpg
    23.6 KB · Views: 180

fschifano

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
3,196
Location
Valley Strea
Format
Multi Format
For my money, nothing beats Tri-X in D-76. That is a match made in heaven. I always use mine at 1+1 because:
  • I hate wasting developer.
  • I use D-76 one shot for the sake of consistency.
  • Because I don't see an appreciable grain advantage to using the developer straight.
XTOL at the same dilution is just as good most of the time and a slightly better choice only if the highlights are hot.
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Here is an example of Tri-X in Pyrocat-MC (semistand development).
I used 1+1+100, shot at EI 200, dev at 70*F, 13 minutes (initial one minute and four inv every 3 minutes). Presoak. Water stop. TF-4 fixer.
What I like about it is how sharp it is, even for enlarging. I should probably mention that this is printed on Kentmere Kentona using Ilford Bromophen developer at 1+3 dilution.
- Thomas
 

Attachments

  • 2007 Car Show 019s.jpg
    228.9 KB · Views: 211
Last edited by a moderator:

mabman

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
834
Location
Winnipeg, MB
Format
35mm
Fugazi Dave said:
I shoot TX at both EI 200 and EI 1600, developed in HC 110 Dilution B for 6 and 16 minutes respectively at 68ºF. This has been my standard for years, though recently I've developed a soft spot for Tri-X Pan 320.
Click to expand...

If you don't mind me asking, what style of agitation are you using? I've done a few rolls of Tri-X at 1600 also at 68 degrees and for 16 minutes in dilution B, and ended up with somewhat overdeveloped negatives, using 10 sec/min agitation throughout.
 
OP
OP

Peter Schrager

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
4,203
Location
fairfield co
Format
Large Format
new tri-x

I just have to say that APUG'ERS are most the giving bunch-just look at this thread. who besides Thomas is using the film now?? I can't believe that the film is so changed versus the older version. I've only used the new asa 320 sheet film and it nothing but improved over the old. of course this IS rollfilm and has different characteristics. I had better call B+H and order some for myself.
Thanks again to all of you....
Peter
 

David R Munson

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2003
Messages
425
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Format
Medium Format

Agitate for the first 30 seconds, let stand the next 30 seconds, and the rest of the time agitate 5 seconds every 30. I like a good, full-bodied negative, but I wouldn't call what I get overdeveloped.
 

tac

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
245
Location
Appalachia
Format
Medium Format
tri-x

I was recently given a Pentax Spotmatic, hot stuff circa 1965, in fully functional condition, so I immediately went out and bought a short roll of Tri-X; it just seemed like the right thing to do.
This will be the first roll of TX I have processed since the intro of TMY (when was that? 85?) Anyway, this should be a hoot!
 

BBarlow690

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2004
Messages
193
Format
Large Format
Hi, Peter. Tri-X in HC-110 Dilution B... But also Clayton F76+. Clayton gives a little more oomf to the mid-tones (oomf: a technical term), whereas HC110 B depresses them a hair, IMHO. Both seem to last forever, too, and aren't fussy to use.

See you soon, I hope.

BB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…