Tri-x in pyro

m_liddell · Mar 22, 2005

I looking for an ISO 400 35mm film (to be shot at 400) to use handheld mainly in urban settings, giving sharply defined grain, good midtone separation and wide exposure latitude.

I only use pyrocat hd to develop my film since I love it for landscapes which I mostly shoot, and shoot so little film I dont want to worry about another developer going bad sitting on a shelf. This should also give close to full film speed.

Tri-x I guess is probably the classic street/documentary film so its first on my list, anyone have an experience with it in pyro devs? Do you still get sharply defined grain or does the staining give more mushy grain?

Tom Duffy · Mar 22, 2005

I don't think TX 400 works well in Pyrocat. You don't get much of a tonal scale. I'd stick with D76 1:1 or perhaps rodinal.

Tom Hoskinson · Mar 22, 2005

Tom Duffy said:
I don't think TX 400 works well in Pyrocat. You don't get much of a tonal scale. I'd stick with D76 1:1 or perhaps rodinal.

Tri-X works fine in Pyrocat-HD. Take a look at George Provost's work.

J&C Classic 400 plus works very well in Pyrocat-HD, as does Kodak TMY 400.

Bob Carnie · Mar 22, 2005

I have found that Trix rated at 400 is marginally about as high as I would rate the ISO. Going to 200 , 100 or 50 ISO for images with bright lighting conditions is when this film works best with Pyro IMO.
I would not rate TriX higher than 400 and expect the results I expect with Pyro at 100 or 200.
I agree with using D76 straight or 1:1 with an ISO rating 400 or above with Tri X. for me this is a push situation that I do not think Pyro handles well.

fhovie · Mar 22, 2005

The key here is he wants to use this combination in 35mm. Tri-x in 35 mm needs some help unless you like lots of grain - Tri-x in pyro is a staple of mf and lf but I would recommend TMAX400 in XTOL or - APX100 or FP4 - .... Unless the enlargements are restricted to 5x7. Some have done stunning work with Microdol in 35mm with tri-x - I guess that is ok as well but I think the TMAX400 will be more pleasing.

Tom Duffy · Mar 22, 2005

Tom,
Let's be clear here. I think tri-x 320 is great in pyrocat. It's my combination of choice.
I think tri-x 400 in pyrocat is a pretty bad combination. As long as you understand the distinction I'm making you are free to disagree.
Take care,
Tom

Tom Hoskinson · Mar 22, 2005

I lost the bubble here and failed to see the distinction. Sorry, Tom.

brennerp98 · Mar 23, 2005

I use PMK, not pyrocat, but have found a serious problem with the new ASA 400 Tri-X, which I use in medium format when I need to hand-hold.

The "old" Tri-X stained beautifully, almost identical to HP5+. I preferred Tri-X because I found (your mileage may vary) that, given identical subject, exposure, and development, Tri-X was a bit punchier and a bit faster.

However, the new 400 medium format Tri-X stains weirdly and I can't get the look I'm like. So I'm now using HP5+.

Obviously, the above comments apply specifically to 400 Tri-X medium format. Don't know, but I get the impression you are shooting 35mm. My guess is that whatever changed in medium format 400 Tri-X also changed in 35mm, but who knows? Also, who knows what pyrocat does with the new Tri-X? So all the above may not be worth much.

Good luck,

Paul

lee · Mar 23, 2005

I will probably take heat for this but PMK in 35mm might not be the best developer for this format. I have always seen a larger than normal grain structure with PMK. Now in 4x5 or larger PMK loves HP5+. When I used it I got full box speed from PMK. I have started using Pyrocat-HD for my own reasons.

lee\c

Tri-x in pyro

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency