Tri-X with Acufine and other developers.

[volver]

Hi,
I never used Tri-X before, my main 400 film was Neopan 400, after the discontinuation i switched to HP5+, as it was quite cheap ($50 for 100 feet).
HP5+ was never as good as Neopan, too gray in midtones for me, and moderate when pushed with Microphen. As HP5+ roll finished i tried a Tri-X with Acufine at ISO 1000. It was way better than Neopan with Microphen, and much better than an HP5+, the grain was as it was Agfa APX100.

Is it a Tri-X was that good or it's beacuse of Acufine developer? What is the best high acutance developer to use at ISO 400?

Here are some shots made after sunset at ISO 1000 (click for fullres)

 

[gone]

Yep, those shots look very similar to what I got the last time I used Tri-X in Acufine (even though I had shot mine at box speed or 250, I can't remember which). It's a really good combination, not that critical on ISO, and really, a lot better developer than most people are aware of. My preference is the tonality of stuff like D76, but I could get by w/ just Acufine quite nicely. If you shoot it at lower ISO the grain will get a lot less noticeable.

And yes, Tri-X IS that good.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

It's a classic combination. I use it often.

 

[Zedwardson]

Tri-X really is a excellent film, and if it was to end production, it would be a bigger blow in my options then even loosing Kodachrome.

Also, Lovely lovely skintones.

 

[doughowk]

Bruce Robbins at "The Online Darkroom" blog has turned me on to Tri-X 400 with SPUR Acurol-N. The combination has resulted in excellent negs that are easy to print.

 

[volver]

Thanks for all comments.

doughowk
will try Acurol-N soon