Tri-X Push Processing - how far can you go?

Go / back

H
Go / back

  • 2
  • 0
  • 50
untitled

untitled

  • 6
  • 0
  • 109
Crow

H
Crow

  • 4
  • 3
  • 88
part 2

A
part 2

  • 5
  • 0
  • 170
Sonatas XII-32 (Homes)

A
Sonatas XII-32 (Homes)

  • 2
  • 2
  • 193

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,410
Messages
2,791,191
Members
99,899
Latest member
muhsintpd
Recent bookmarks
1

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
I've got a [free] roll of Tri-X, and I've been thinking about how far i may be able to push-process it (just for fun). Does anybody have any suggestions about how extreme of a push is possible and development reccomendations.

I've got D-76, Dektol and T-Max (not RS) and maybe some HC-110 (don't think so, though) developers available, so reccomendations there would be nice ...

Thanks
 

Donald Miller

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
6,230
Format
Large Format
The logical question that follows your question is ...what are you planning on printing the resulting negative on? Beyond that what developer are you planning on using?

People talk about pushing film with no idea of the effects on film both from the standpoint of achieving exposure but also from the standpoint of what density range you are achieving within the negative.
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
I think the question is: why?
I mean, you can overdevelop film until you're blue in the face, but to what end?
Here is an example of what I am talking about:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1512
Eventually you get images that resulted from light levels so negligible that it shows artefacts such as in this example. (and, btw, that was done in Rodnal, I think!). Also, type TriX into the search feature - I got too many hits to go through - pushing TriX is not exactly something foreign to this forum:smile:
TriX is great, its probably the all around best B&W film ever made, and it will do a lot of crazy things for you if you ask it. Perhaps you could go further than that, arriving at some highly flawed, pure black and pure white, foggy thing with no tonality at all...but why?
Then again, I don't see why people breed hairless cats, but some pay big money for them - different folks...
 

agGNOME

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
217
Location
New Orleans,
Format
Multi Format
Totally subjective because obviously there are no bounds, but my personal tastes for Tri-x are anywhere from 200-1600. In this range I have no doubt of tri-x's abilities coupled with the right developer,method, and purpose. Everyone's criteria will differ, but what always holds true is that the technical side of photography is a balance of compromises. cameron
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
First of all, to that link: Tri-X @ EI 102,400 - just ... wow ... I didn't even know that that was possible - at all -.

There's really no reason, it's a "Why Not?" kind of thing here ...

If I were to print the negatives, it would be on Ilford MGIV, Kodak Polycontrast or Patterson Accugrade (I stick with RC stuff and those are what I currently have). I'm really just trying to see if the negatives will come out at all; purely for exercise, not for practical usage.


Donald miller said
Beyond that what developer are you planning on using?

If you're asking print developer (not sure why) - Dektol. Film developer, I have: D-76, T-Max Developer and Dektol.

Perhaps I should ask it this way: What's the maximun anyone has TRIED with this film, and what were the results?
 

df cardwell

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,357
Location
Dearborn,Mic
Format
Multi Format
How you measure speed is the critical answer.

Shadows ?

Zone II ? MAYBE, without latent image intensification or cold amping, EI 3200 in D76 1+1, or better, XTOL 1+1.

Highlights ?

Zone VII ? 12800, in T MAX developer.

Try it, and you'll have an idea.

Remember, "pushing" film is about underexposing the dark areas of the scene, and overdeveloping the bright areas to compensate. We did a lot of things 40 years ago because we had to !

Pictorially, it can be very cool. I'd use either the D-76 1+1 or Dektol 1+10. But you'll probably have to invest in some Tri X to find out for sure. Visit the Kodak webpage for Tri-X and see what data already exists: there is a neat contrast chart for all kinds of developers and contrast targets.

.
 

derevaun

Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
67
Location
Oly, WA
Format
Multi Format
As with many things in the big crazy world, why not give it a try before the line runs off your hand? You might want to use a fast-acting developer. And this project would be a good one to segregate from the quest-for-yet-another-perfect-pictorial-print project.
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
htmlguru4242 said:
There's really no reason, it's a "Why Not?" kind of thing here ...

I just hope you didn't take my comments the wrong way - they were intended somewhat humorously, I sincerely hope I didn't come across as condascending! Best of luck - its all about having fun after all!

Cheers,

Peter.
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
Gnashings - don't worry about it; not condescending at all; I think that i may have misinterpereted a bit, but oh well ...

I'm going to try this this evening @ EI 50,000 with Tri-X and Delta 3200 and see what happens - should be "fun".

I'll report results when (and if) I get anyhting.
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
htmlguru4242 said:
Gnashings - don't worry about it; not condescending at all; I think that i may have misinterpereted a bit, but oh well ...

I'm going to try this this evening @ EI 50,000 with Tri-X and Delta 3200 and see what happens - should be "fun".

I'll report results when (and if) I get anyhting.

I'll be looking forward to it - you should take a look at that this, too:

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4441

I found it pretty inspirational, the guys there got some really outstanding results from Tri X and Rodinal - really surprising tonality for such an extreme push.
Of course, if you are looking for more "graphic" results, I would try Dektol - I am promissing myself to try it after seeing the results my friend got: really dramatic images.
Once again, sorry if my initial message lost a lot "in translation", I suppose that is why I am not a best selling author :D

Cheers,

Peter.
 

NikoSperi

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
575
Location
Italy
Format
Multi Format
gnashings said:
Then again, I don't see why people breed hairless cats, but some pay big money for them - different folks...
Have you ever been snuggled up to by a Sphynx? Then you would know why they are such amazing animals...
As for the Tri-X... I'm inclined to agree with you, despite the fact that I like alot of Andrew's photos. I just don't see the print as being the ideal medium to display them...
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
Ok, I just shot 6 frames of Tri-X and Delta @ EI 51,200. I'll develop them tomorrow or Saturday and see what happens ...

Development reccomendations, anyone?

I have TMax, D-76 and Dektol.
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
NikoSperi said:
Have you ever been snuggled up to by a Sphynx? Then you would know why they are such amazing animals...

I have nothing against the animals - I have issues with the people who like to play God and create these unfortunate, crippled creatures for their own amusement...

htmlguru4242 said:
Ok, I just shot 6 frames of Tri-X and Delta @ EI 51,200. I'll develop them tomorrow or Saturday and see what happens ...

Development reccomendations, anyone?

I have TMax, D-76 and Dektol.

Do you know what "effect" you are going for? Do you want to actually get as close to a "proper" image as possible - or do you want a really "out there" effect (probably more likely to be attainable)?

Peter.
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
The odd, super-pushed look is what I'm trying for now ; a good image would be nice, but I'm pretty sure that its not going to happen at all with the Tri-X and only slightly more likely withe the Delta.

So whatever happens happens, I'd really like to "perfect" this (such as it is), but ...

Looking at the dev. charts, it seems like about 40 minutes in D-76 or about 30 minutes in TMax for the Tri-X

For the Delta, it seems about 30 in D-76 and 25 for TMax dev.

These are just what I think are approximations looking at the Massive Dev Chart data.

Are these about good or am I way off base here?
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
Ok, I tried this wiht the Delta 3200 first, (running hte Tri-X tonight) and the results are ... interesting. I did 45 minutes in D-76 @ 68F

The negatives are all very thin, and there's only one image that MAY be printable, though it would not be easy ... I can see some density (if it can be called that) in all frames, though.

I'm assuming that more development would help this?
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
I had some horrible luck with Delta 3200, with the same results as you describe - thin, thin almost non-existant negs... Keep us posted, I really hope you tame this!
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
I had some horrible luck with Delta 3200, with the same results as you describe - thin, thin almost non-existant negs...

At 3200 and 6400 this isn't an issue for me; the negs. are low contrast, but they're printable ... I'm going to try TMax developer and see if I can get any better results. Can't wait to try the Tri - X ...
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
Duhhhhh

Ooook; I thought I'd exposed at EI 50000, but I messed up; I metered at EI 3200 and exposed 5 stops lower; that's EI 100000 (actually 102400, but oh well). Some frames were done at EI 50000 and those were the ones that came out the densest (well, that's a relative term). So maybe I'll double [triple?] the development time and raise the temp. to see how it comes out.
 

gnashings

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
1,376
Location
Oshawa, Onta
Format
Multi Format
Don't fret - we've all been there, done that, I think:smile:
Now I have to get off my ass and soup the roll of Delta 3200 I have sitting around, before the cosmic rays turn it into an abstract design...
I think I have to get some Microphen...
 
OP
OP
htmlguru4242

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
Ok, i ran the last strip of the Delta roll - the Tri-X is somewhere ... temporarily "misplaced" it.

The shots were done at EI 50,000 and 100,000. I developed for 95 min. @ 68ºF with agitation every 30sec.

The images taken indoors came out pretty nicely. Shadow detail is [obviously] lacking, but the images are overall ecceptable. However, once again, the imagaes taken outside did not really come out at all. There ARE images on almost all the frames, but once again, they are quite thin. I'll post the images once I can scan / print them.

Once I can find that Tri-X, maybe I'll get good results ...
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom