More Tri-X reversal failures - analysis please.

[georgegrosu]

I found a picture with Kodak Double X reversal process b&w.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2112144...in/photostream

George

[mr.datsun]

I found a picture with Kodak Double X reversal process b&w.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2112144...in/photostream

George

George. Thank-you. Is Double X the same as Tri-X? In general it works even though that one is, too, quite flat. Although it isn't as flat as mine and it could be just a very dull day.

[mr.datsun]

For a good information about KODAK TRI-X Reversal Film 7266 see:
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploa...ts_bw_7266.pdf
For good information about the recommended treatment see:
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploa...2415_h2415.pdf pages 23.
I make tests on Kodak Double X 5222 reversible procces.
The results show somewhat similar to the one here.
I think it's important film (fogg to be small).
Then chances to get a reverse image of b&w are much larger.
I had no time to do tests on film Agfa Pan Aviphot 200 and 400 with fogg
below 0.10.

George

George, thank-you I have read those documents. D94a is not available to me. I have to use a paper developer. What you seem to be saying is that the results are always going to be flat!

[mr.datsun]

Typically the amount of sodium thiosulfate is 8 to 12 g/l in the first developer despite what a previous poster says. It is used to produce clear highlights. Read the Ilford site on reversal processing carefully.

If using the permanganate bleach be sure to follow the formula exactly. Specifically in the amount of acid used.

Since each film reacts differently it is important to practice with the cine film and not regular tri-X.

Hi Gerald. I have read the Ilford docs and they were my starting point. My first test was 5g sodium thiosulfate in 330ml - I got a 20% overall density image and film edge. The second test was 0.5g in 330ml - I got a 80% density image. Even 0.1g washed the image out a bit.

Some people seem to use 30g/L without my problems .

[mr.datsun]

Guys, the second development should go to completion so time there should not be a huge factor. The bleach should remove all of the negative silver image. So, what we are seeing is a failure in the first developer to develop a high contrast image (and then some) that leaves no silver in the highlights. Look at the positive. There is silver in the highlights.

Hypo in the first developer is there to force physical development and to get a good negative image. You do not have that nailed yet. That is where the problem lies.

PE

PE. The trouble is that my sodium thiosulfate tests show a complete reversal of the notion that hypo forces anything. In my case it bleaches the positive image overall. Please refer to my response to Gerald for the amounts I am using.

[mr.datsun]

OH...permananate....ok---well...8' to clear--then give it a bit MORE to be SURE that you get all that developed silver...ALSO--second development should be like 3 minutes or so..don't do too much or there's stuff "left behind" that will get developed and cause fog and flatness...this is why you must FIX after the 2nd development too.

but very strong first deveoper--you may try 1+1 actually instead of 1+2--stronger the better contrast!

but DO keep that hypo OUT of the developer!!!!!! it's only added in the olde recipies to speed the development process for movie film--when they needed a very FAST deveopment of like 2 minutes or so to process HUGE rolls of film in machines....you have the luxury of time now, in fact, you NEED as much time in the chems as possible to keep it uniform.

keep experimenting, but err in the way of HOT first deveoper with NO hypo

ALSO--change your bleach--dichromate is WAY better---WAY better.

But permanganate works. Dichromate is not allowed in UK.

I also get a flat image without the hypo.

If I have to use liquid dektol at 1+1 I can't afford to use it. That would be £10 per film. At 1+5 I'm using a dilution commensurate with other peoples' experience (double print strength) and it is apparently developing to completion at stage 1.

[mr.datsun]

Since each film reacts differently it is important to practice with the cine film and not regular tri-X.

You're right, I think trying Tri-X 35mm is a total dead end. I have ordered a new re-fillable Super 8 cartridge and will load it with small strips of Tri-X Reversal and start again, hopefully a little wiser and more experienced.

If Tri-X Super 8 doesn't work then I'm certainly switching to another film!

[georgegrosu]

I always use raw chemical for preparations of solutions.
Reversible process b & w you should read densities of film.
At least fog density and high density.
From memory, the Kodak Double X (as reversal process b & w) fog was ~ 0.3 and maximum density was ~ 2.6.
If you look at the characteristic curve of KODAK TRI-X 7266 is not
as rich in density curve as a negative film.
Again, I think better results can be obtained on films with small fog.
I have not worked with KODAK TRI-X.

George

[johnielvis]

You're right, I think trying Tri-X 35mm is a total dead end. I have ordered a new re-fillable Super 8 cartridge and will load it with small strips of Tri-X Reversal and start again, hopefully a little wiser and more experienced.

If Tri-X Super 8 doesn't work then I'm certainly switching to another film!

so it's not yourprocess, it's the film...right....ok

well, tri-x is done reversal and returns fine results all the time, that's a FACT.

bleach really doesn't matter as long as it gets the job done...obviously the permananate you're using is diluted to keep it from wrecking the film, which permanganate does since it's nasty strong. If you can't get dichromate because it's a controlled substance then so be it, but it don't matter as long as it can bleach film clear eventually and you leave it in long enough.

hypo in the first developer will likely be your undoing...leave it out and get your process to work without it--it has proven totally unnecessary for regular tank developing.

[johnielvis]

If I have to use liquid dektol at 1+1 I can't afford to use it. That would be £10 per film.....

no...THAT will be your undoing.

you need high contrast first deveopment--you're only developing 35mm and super 8...hardly any chemicals used at all and THAT'S too expensive? Then you can't afford to do it, sorry to say.

Every "smartcookie" macguyver genius out there thinks that the laws of physics will bend for them because they are so brilliant and they don'tWANT to have to spend money like normal "stupid" people.

good luck with that.