Tri-X in R09 One Shot ?

[runswithsizzers]

So far, my recent b&w negative processing experience is limited to about 9-10 rolls of Ilford HP5+ developed in R09 One Shot (film size is 120). Both are available at the university where I am taking a medium format photography class. The school supply store is out of HP5, so I am considering trying Kodak Tri-X 400 (or possibly T-Max 400).

If I understand correctly, the R09 One Shot is Rodinal, right? I have read that Rodinal works best with lower speed films, and tends to promote more grain with higher speed films. Based on my limited experiece with R09 and HP5+ the grain is not too bad. But, as I recall from shooting 35mm negs back in the early 1970s, wasn't Tri-X notoriously grainy?

My questions is:
Will Tri-X 400 have more visible grain than HP5+ if both are developed normally in R09?

Or, put another way:
If I want to avoid obvious grain, should I develop Tri-X in something other than R09?

For now, I am not interested in push processing. Our instructor recommends exposing at one-half of box ISO (EI 200), but we use normal developing times.

 

[MattKing]

Modern Tri-X is a lot less grainy than Tri-X in the 1970s.
And R09 is one of the common versions of Rodinal.
I haven't used Rodinal since, well, the 1970s. Historically it tended to emphasize acutance (even if it isn't technically an acutance developer). Acutance is the objective component that tends to have the greatest weight when making observations of the subjective characteristic referred to as "sharpness". You might find that you really like how Tri-X looks in R09, even if the results tend more toward "sharp" then "smooth".

 

[awty]

RO9 Be fine for medium format or bigger. Tends to suffer on faster film in 35mm.
Tri x is very different film to hp5 so worth experiencing (same goes for tmax). Tri x has its uses, but I much prefer hp5 in that film speed.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Modern Tri-X is a lot less grainy than Tri-X in the 1970s.
And R09 is one of the common versions of Rodinal.
I haven't used Rodinal since, well, the 1970s. Historically it tended to emphasize acutance (even if it isn't technically an acutance developer). Acutance is the objective component that tends to have the greatest weight when making observations of the subjective characteristic referred to as "sharpness". You might find that you really like how Tri-X looks in R09, even if the results tend more toward "sharp" then "smooth".

Thanks for that encouragement. For me, it's good to know Tri-X is less grainy than it was.

Considering the fact that most of my class work will printed at very modest enlargements - 120 negs most often printed at 8" x 8" with no cropping - neither grain nor sharpness are likely to be much of a problem.

 

[runswithsizzers]

RO9 Be fine for medium format or bigger. Tends to suffer on faster film in 35mm.
Tri x is very different film to hp5 so worth experiencing (same goes for tmax). Tri x has its uses, but I much prefer hp5 in that film speed.

Maybe I should order more HP5+, but try a different developer? I was thinking about trying some Ilford ILFOTEC DD-X with the HP5+.

For now, my main interest is 120 format, but after this semester ends, I will be developing 35mm film at home, and scanning it rather than darkroom printing. At which point film grain is likely to become much more of an issue. So it would be good if any experience I gain with 120 films / developers might carry over to 135.

 

[MattKing]

For me, T-Max 400 is the best choice in 400 speed films.
But I tend to (slightly) prefer Tri-X over HP-5+.
Don't switch until you have tried what you already have.
There are many out there who think (modern) 35mm Tri-X in Rodinal is a combination made in heaven.

 

[awty]

There are many out there who think (modern) 35mm Tri-X in Rodinal is a combination made in heaven.

No accounting for bad taste. Ha! it has a look that works sometimes. I think you really have to understand what it does and where to use it. With printing I like a nice even tonal range and decide what I want in and what I dont. Hp5 gives me that if I can keep the picture within a few stops of light. If not I'll use something else.

 

[awty]

Maybe I should order more HP5+, but try a different developer? I was thinking about trying some Ilford ILFOTEC DD-X with the HP5+.

For now, my main interest is 120 format, but after this semester ends, I will be developing 35mm film at home, and scanning it rather than darkroom printing. At which point film grain is likely to become much more of an issue. So it would be good if any experience I gain with 120 films / developers might carry over to 135.

You should try different films and developers, see what works for you.
To get good results scanning faster film in 35mm depends on a lot of variables and not necessarily just the film or developer. Scanners and how you use them will be a large factor. Again you should try different things.
Enjoy.

 

[runswithsizzers]

For me, T-Max 400 is the best choice in 400 speed films.
But I tend to (slightly) prefer Tri-X over HP-5+.
Don't switch until you have tried what you already have.
There are many out there who think (modern) 35mm Tri-X in Rodinal is a combination made in heaven.

I've read that the T-Max 400 is somewhat more demanding of careful exposure and development compared to HP5+ while others say, not so. I haven't had any particular problems with exposure or development of the HP5+ so, unless T-Max is a lot different, probably not a issue for me.

Have you developed any T-Max 400 in Rodinal?

I do want to try different films and developers, but not too much all at the same time. When I switch back to 35mm, I will experiment more, but for now I want to try either a different 120 film than HP5 - or - a different developer than Rodinal. Not because I don't like the results from that combination, but only because the local shortage of HP5+ is forcing me to order from sources which offer a lot more options.

But I do know this much - I am not going to like any combination of film/developer which results in that gritty, gravel-grain look that some prefer.

 

[jvo]

i use t-max 400 and sometimes 100 in rodinal... i always overexpose one stop AND overdevelop - just what works for me...

i wouldn't recommend changing 2 things at once, stick with rodinal since your most familiar with it, and try a different film for a period to get to try different development scheme's and see how it works for your preferences and needs.

 

[MattKing]

Have you developed any T-Max 400 in Rodinal?

No - but I'd like to try it

 

[JensH]

Hi,

Rodinal and Tri-X 120 is a fantastic combination.
Especially when enlarging 30x30 cm2 or below.
I expose at EI 250 in contrasty/medium contrast situations.

Develope time is 6 minutes @ 18°C and 1:25 dilution.
(this feels like a N- dev., manual processing in a spiral tank , agitation 3 sec each minute)

Best
Jens