3200ASA in HC-110? Now that's something I'd like to see! Have you got any to show, please?
Originally Posted by Athiril
flatbed scan of tri-x slide. black level set using the black of the film edge. this is the Ilford PQ Universal version. Any comments, ideas for improvement, please?
Looks better! How come, I tried PQ once, with Ilford FP4+, the Ilford method actually, and the slides were muddy and grey...You diluted 1:5 or 1+5 ? Ilford says 1+5 if I remember well.
So the best frame was shot at what ASA, 200?
Tofek, yes I meant 1+5. Strange FP4+ was grey, you'd think it might have more punch than pulled TriX. What ASA did you use?
Originally Posted by Tofek
As far as my results, they all look useable but I think 200ASA seems to have best overall balance. Of course this is still 35mm and the true test will be on Super 8.
I think I should verify this test once more to see if I'm getting consistent results.
I do remember getting more contrast and very crisp grain on Super 8 Tri-X when i tried this years ago with a Tetenal kit. The grain on these seems quite gentle.
Tofek – are you going to try Adox Pan-X Reverso?
Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-04-2013 at 12:07 PM. Click to view previous post history.
That's weird, I always thought the contrary : TriX as a contrasty film and FP4+ as a soft film, nevermind. I shot it as 100ASA, but I don't have the time I used with me now...I also use dichromate bleach so maybe this is why our results are different ?
In super 8 I'm using reloadable cartridges "kaccema" so I only buy film in bulk. It's much cheaper than commercial cartridges, here in Europe. So Adox maybe some day...Up to now I was using Orwo UN54, and think about trying the Fomapan. But I didn't really succeed at getting good contrast (that Rodinal must be the reason!) so I might be buying another roll of the Orwo to fix it up, don't know yet
Oh and btw, the TriX super 8 stock changed some years ago (5 maybe?) so perhaps that's why your results are different
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Tofek, I'm a bit confused on the contrast issue as I always thought fast films to be high contrast. But I spoke to someone at Silverprint who recommended paper developer as with faster films I'm going to lose contrast. At least this was in the context of our discussion on reversal. But I checked Tri-X and found it to be described as a medium contrast film. That along with losing contrast through lowering it's IE made me guess I needed the aggressiveness of the PQ. Hope to get my understanding of the issues cleared up one day.
Originally Posted by Tofek
Another thing, though is that I always used Rodinal with HP5 35mm because I liked the flat grainy grey look it gave me.
Yes, your experiences reversal processing have been quite different to mine so I don't know what that is down to. I don't know about the effect of the kind of bleach but one thing is niggling me about the bleach in my process. I forgot to lower the potassium permanganate percentage on the second test. I don't know if that affected the image quality.
Reloadable carts. Sounds good. I wondered how you were doing test strips before you dev'd the whole film.
Tri-X. Yes. I wish they'd go back to the old one. The new one is too forgiving, too smooth. i did everything I could to get it to go grainy with Rodinal and then with PQ – and failed.
Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-04-2013 at 04:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Yes I see your point now about pulling the TriX, thank you for the explanation.
I guess I will have to give up on Rodinal, at least with the Orwo film...A shame since it's my only film developer and lasts for decades. But seeing your results makes me want to retry the PQ !
Of course I meant lowering its exposure - as it's being set at 200 ASA.
Originally Posted by mr.datsun
Originally Posted by Tofek
which film(s) are you getting in bulk? Are the kaccema hard to get hold of?
Sodium Thiosulphate. I found this note on page about reversal processing:
I'm confused about the idea that it might reduce density, as that would make a darker positive. But I wonder whether it be used to get a touch of contrast increase by clearing the hilights?
Basically the developers used in reversal processing are print developers with the addition of hypo (sodium thiosulphate), the amount of which should be varied to suit the film. I've read two accounts of what is accomplished by adding and varying the thiosulphate. One school of thought is that it increases the contrast of the developer, the other is that it reduces the density of the resultant image. It may be that both are true and that the density loss occurs more extensively in the highlights
Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-05-2013 at 05:15 AM. Click to view previous post history.
By reducing density of the negative, the solvent will reduce the density of the positive, since it affects non reduced Ag+ : if I understood well, with potassium thiocyanate, SCN- reacts with the silver halides complex Ag(X) and forms Ag(SCN) + X-, thus making less silver prone to reduction available, which means less density, whether it's on the negative or positive. And since the amount added to the developer is around 2-5g, it's easy to put too much of it and spoil the density. That's what happened to me...but I guess if you add just the right amount it should clear highlights without spoiling the darks, increasing contrast. There's also the sodium thiosulphate which reacts the same, but one is stronger than the other, and I don't remember whether it's KSCN or Na2S2O3.
Another variant I read about is using the solvent as a separate bath after bleach and clearing, what would this change? Maybe more control, since you can work in daylight at this stage?
As for the film in bulk, I buy it from Wittner Cinetec, Germany. They have Orwo UN54, Fomapan and Agfa Scala 200X.