• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Tried Plus-X. Results not as I expected.

Obtong

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
95
Location
Olympia, WA
Format
35mm
I've been shooting 35mm with Tri-X for as long as I can remember so when the Northwest saw a little sunshine I decided to give Plus-X a try. To my surprise, my negatives came out quite thin, and I had an awful time trying to make decent prints from them this evening. Most of the time I needed to use a MG 4 or 5 filter to get satisfactory print, whereas I only occasionally need to use filters for my Tri-X negatives.

For this roll of Plus-X film I set my meter for 125 ISO. I developed for 7 minutes in D-76, 1+1, at 68 degrees. I agitated for the first 30 seconds (inversions), and then for 5 seconds every 30 seconds. (It is the same technique I use with my Tri-X film for which I get pretty good negatives on a consistent basis.)

Can anyone give me anypointers as to what I should be ding with Plus-X to get better negatives? I had a really frustrating evening in the darkroom which I don't want to repeat any time soon!

~Dom
 
Hmm...Do you happen to have scans of the prints?
 
No scanner at the moment, but I will see if I can make a scan at work.
 
From my experience, the Plus-X look certainly is diffrent but I haven't seen it as quite dramatic as what you describe. I'm assuming it was fresh film and chemistry?
 
Yes, fresh film and chemistry. Perhaps I need to spend a little more time getting to know Plus-X?
 
Interesting. As I think about it more...I haven't shot plus-x in a while and it did give me somewhat of a hard time and I developed to the D-76 package timing which is diffrent than that Kodak publication so I'll have to add on some time. Time to revisit Plus-X .
 
fschifano said:
Seven minutes is not enough time. Check page 3 of this documnet. It works, and it works well.
Click to expand...

Thanks! So it's 8 1/2 minutes at 68 degrees with D76 at 1+1. I will give that a try and also download these new Kodak data sheets. I was using the older data sheet F8 from September 1997!

~Dom
 
I was using the older data sheet F8 from September 1997!
Click to expand...
That datasheet says 7 minutes? Interesting, just for the heck of it, I just looked up the time from my 1969 Kodak Darkroom dataguide and the time it shows for Plus-X in D76 1:1 is 8 1/2 minutes. I use Xtol now, but I've run lots of Plux-X using D76 1:1 and 8.5 - 9 minutes works well.

Aside from that, is your meter or metering technique might be off too, at 125 you don't have as much room for error as you do with Tri-X. Are the negs just low in contrast, or do you have bad shadow density too? 7 minutes is a 20% reduction, a lot, but not really bad perhaps.
 


With the next roll develop the negatives for 20-30% more time.
 
I've never had a problem with PX and the published times. When the moved films over to the new machines circa 2003, I thought some of the development times got extended... so old data sheets might not be appropriate?
 
did you bracket you exposures to see
what exposures look best for the time
you processed the film ?

sometimes a simple bracket ( +1 /- 1 ) is the easiest
way to test a new film and developer.
 
These are all things to consider, but seven minutes isn't enough time for that film, in that developer, at that temperature. If after running the film using Kodak's recommended time the results still aren't good, you can try the other stuff. An over exposed negative will be more dense, but they'll still be flat and will need a hard paper to print decently. Plus-X is really nice when you treat it right. It's not terribly finicky and it's generally pretty darned good at box speed. I think it's a whole lot nicer than some of the "boutique" films that are touted so loudly here.
 
Here's the F8, September 1997 Data Sheet I inadvertently used. (For historical/archival purposes. Do not use!)
 

Attachments

  • Plus X Old Data Sheet.JPG
    104.3 KB · Views: 107
  • f8.pdf
    78.9 KB · Views: 129
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been happy with D-76/ID-11 1+1 for 8.5 minutes and also 1+3 for 13 minutes. I shoot Plus-X at 100 instead of 125 and negatives I consider to be properly exposed usually print easily on grade 2.
 
It really is this simple:

1. If you don't have enough shadow detail - expose more.
2. If you don't have enough contrast - develop more.

Repeat as necessary until you have negatives that print to your satisfaction.

It's up to you, not Kodak, to make sure you have negative density that prints well. Sure, the character of the film will be slightly different from film to film. But results depend a lot more on the user technique and how they improve it, than the film and/or developer itself.

- Thomas
 
An over exposed negative will be more dense, but they'll still be flat and will need a hard paper to print decently.
Click to expand...

The negatives are quite thin, you can see through them quite easily, including the highlights.
 
Thomas Bertilsson said:
1. If you don't have enough shadow detail - expose more.
2. If you don't have enough contrast - develop more.

Repeat as necessary until you have negatives that print to your satisfaction.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is definitely not enough contrast in this set of negatives. I will try developing my next roll for 8.5 minutes (D76 1+1, 68 degrees) and see how that works out.

~Dom
 
I'd follow Thomas' suggestion(s). And, Frank is right -- your development time isn't long enough (extend about 1.5 minutes). I haven't shot Plus-X in a long time (typically, I use Tri-X), but do recall it being a very nice film -- extremely underrated. If you experiment with a few rolls -- at box speed -- I'm sure you'll starting getting the results you're after.
 
If your negs are thin in the shadows, you have underexposed. If thin in the highlights, you have underdeveloped, generally.

My theory here is that you metered in the highlights when you were shooting and did not expose for the shadows, thus underexposing. A very common error in sunny weather, which we have all the time here, esp. with matrix type metering
 
Hmmmm, looking at the Massive Dev Chart, the times are for the older film. (There is a note to that effect in the Massive Dev Chart, but it also says that starting times are the same.)

This is a good reminder to find the most recent manufacturers' info you can.
 
***************
How do the edge markings look. Seven minutes 1:1 seems kind of short to me. IIRC, we souped Plux-X for about six minutes in straight D76. But it's been a long time since using it.
 
The older version of the film is the one referred to in the 1997 data sheet you linked to - it is called "KODAK Plus-X Pan or KODAK Plus-X Pan Professional film".

The newer version of the film is now known as "KODAK Professional Plus-X 125 film" and the Kodak data sheet for it is f4018:

http://wwwcaen.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4018/f4018.pdf.

That data sheet highlights the differences between the versions.

If your negatives are thin when shot at EI 125, that suggests to me that it could be something to do with the metering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register