Would you recommend Tri-X or HP5+ for pushing? (and other questions about pushing film)

[MattKing]

Is there anything you have read in the discussion that would shift your recommendation from TMZ to a 400 ISO film? I have *one* roll of Tri-X and two rolls of TMZ. My baseline is to shoot TMZ. Honestly, now that I have it, what else am I gonna do with it? But if you changed your mind, I'd rather know.

Not really.
But whatever you choose, you will get a result that contributes to your accumulation of experience and the refining of your preferences - the 1000 rolls and 10,000 hours referred to by @koraks . While that may be a bit of shorthand, it really has a huge kernel of truth in it.
And if you chose something different next time, you will get a different result. The result you prefer will be partially as a result of objective criteria, and partially as a result of subjective choices. And you could very well get two different results out of the two different choices that please you in different ways.

I've currently got four prints matted, framed and ready for transport out to the gathering point from which my Darkroom Group's group show will be organized for its opening in September. For fun, the four prints each come from different rolls of film, using four different formats of film, exposed using four different camera systems, each of which originated in a different era.

I was able to essentially play like this, because of the experience that preceded it.

Hope you have fun during the visit, and are both pleased and informed by the photographs.

 

[koraks]

Are you trying to tell me that I should not do something that I feel would be fun and interesting because you personally wouldn't do it?

Nope, you should do as you please. And I think you should do so regardless of what anyone else says or think about it. Perhaps the 10k hours is more about that than about the negatives you're about to make in that cave.

 

[albireo]

I haven't read the full thread so probably this has already been recommended - @dcy do you have access to a Canon EOS body? I'm a Nikon user but I've been using a Canon SLR for a while and they have amazing image stabilised primes.

In case you can borrow from a friend - this could be a nice use case for a Canon EOS 28mm IS, a roll of Delta 3200 exposed at 1000 and Xtol 1:1. Inhale, hold your breath, steady yourself against a pole or handrail, set the self shooting mode on the camera to fire with a 2 sec delay, and take that shot home!

 

[snusmumriken]

the 1000 rolls and 10,000 hours referred to by @koraks

This is not something to aim for. It has taken me a lifetime to clock up 320 b/w rolls (plus maybe about 100 colour rolls for work). As I have unexpectedly become 70 (for which I suppose I must be thankful ), I will clearly never be more than a beginner - but people have jobs and family, cars and houses to maintain, not to mention other interests besides photography. Nevertheless, film photography has been a wonderful passion along the way. It’s travelling hopefully that matters. Have fun trying things out, @dcy.

 

[koraks]

This is not something to aim for.

I don't think anyone suggested it.

Have fun trying things out

What I tried to do, was to suggest something to try out which I think might be very interesting. But it evidently wasn't understood, so I'll drop the idea.

 

[bluechromis]

Wow, I never heard the claim for a speed increase using potassium sulfite. I guess I'm throwing out my stash of sodium sulfite and will starting using potassium sulfite for all my homemade developers.

There are some downsides to P. sulfite. It exhausts the fixer more rapidly. It tends to be more expensive and harder to find. Anchell and Troop made it sound like the advantage was most noticeable when film is pushed more than two stops. But it certainly seems worth exploring. A & T thought an Xtol-type developer with P. sulfite could be a winner.