TriX developing times

[pau68]

Hi,
this is my first post to this forum, although I've been reading it
for some time looking for advice.

I've been using TriX for some time (a year) and, after some tests,
I established my normal development with D76 1+1. My developing
times - placing zone I on one side, and zones VIII, IX and X on the
other - are substantially higher (40%) than those written in D76 or TriX
informations, but I wasn't too much concerned, since there are
many factors involved. This times are more or less the same
for 35mm or 120.

However, today I've done my first test with PlusX, and using the same
dilution and agitation pattern as in the case of TriX, the development
times I get are more or less the ones that appear in the information
leaflets.

Is this discrepancy between films normal (I am using the same developer,
dilution, temperature, agitation pattern) or is a symptom of a hidden
mistake?

Thanks!
Pau

 

[John Bragg]

Hi Pau, and welcome to APUG.

It sounds to me that your times are right, just that you have found (as many other photographers have) that Kodaks published times for Tri-X (in its latest improved formulation) are essentially far too short with some developers. If you are getting good results then relax.

Regards, John.

 

[BBarlow690]

Be firm in your convictions!

There are many variables that would have you using different development times. Mine changed when I moved to NH from Chicago - different water, different pH. And don't, for one minute, believe that Kodak knows... They said Tri-X times would decrease when they went to the new machine a couple years ago. Nope. I tested longer.

Test for yourself, and take no one's word!

 

[pau68]

Thanks for your comments.
After my first post I've been thinking about my process, and I think
the results are consistent. The only think that worried me is that
I've never read that other people have such a different times with D-76
(unlike HC-110, for example).
Best,
Pau

 

[glennfromwy]

I have the opposite problem. Most recommended times for just about everything are way too long for me. Except Plus-X. It's right on the money. I also blame it on the water.

 

[nexus]

We have to use 125ISO plus x and 400 tri-x for school and have been recommended to use d-76.

our teachers have told us 7mins for the plus x and 9 mins for the tri-x.

i just did the 400 tonight and the 9 mins seemed to have worked (30sec agitation for the first 30sec and then 3 inversions every 30secs)

 

[lawrenceimpey]

I have also found that Kodak's times for the 'new' Tri-X are far too short. I was totally surprised by this because, as you point out, their times for the other emulsions are pretty much on the money (certainly as far as my technique is concerned). I have no explanation for this because we are not talking here about just 'a bit too short' but 'substantially too short'. Maybe they made a mistake?

 

[climbabout]

development times

Pau - welcome!
The best advice I ever heard was to find a film/developer/paper combination that works for you and then stick with it. If you've found a developer/film combo that works well with the paper you like and stay with it, you've eliminated the 3 biggest variables and you can then concentrate on fine tuning your system and making photographs. Your personal times and film speed are just that - personal - don't worry if they are significantly different than someone else's. Good luck!
Tim