How's My Reversing? (Tri-X Reversal 7266 in D19)
Tri-X Reversal in D19. New EI/dev time tests. Stock at 20C.
You can see that even by 12m I have just reached a usable 100ASA. Increasing from 4m to 8m appears to give a one stop speed increase, The step from 8m to 12m did't gain that much. I estimate that I need 16m to get 200ASA.
The standard (most common) times for this combination seems to be 200ASA dev'd for 6-7mins in stock solution (source: numerous internet samples and anecdotal evidence even on this forum).
Why do I appear to need 2x or 3x the development to get a 'normal' 200ASA result for this film/dev combination?
(And seems interesting in light of the similarly dark positives I was consistently getting from Tri-X 35mm tested in PQ and Liquid Dektol)
Could there be something I am getting consistently wrong in my process (Permanganate bleach/Clearing sol from Foma kit. Same developer at half duration for 2nd dev)?
[You should be able to click through these to get zoomed in version:]
NB. Let me add that I'm pleased to be getting towards decent results but feel that something doesn't quite add up.
Last edited by mr.datsun; 03-11-2013 at 07:20 PM. Click to view previous post history.
looks like between 8 and 12 minutes at ei 100 is good middle grey is in the middle
looks like 10 minutes should be about right. try that.
You also may want to try 1:1 diluition for 10 minutes--it sounds counterintuitive, but some developers need to be dliuted with water to get more power.
don't worry about them other people's times...this is why people give up. everyone elses times always 6 minutes. the 6 minutes is for people adding hypo probably. stay away from that for now. You are on the RIGHT track experimenting with times higher than what other people say. Anything like over 10 minutes, watch for fog developing and overall dmax being lost. just increase the times till your happy or till you start to see ill effects of dmax reduction from developing fog due to too long in the developer.
more diluted may give you a more pleasing contrast too--that may be playing tricks with your eyes as well....
Also--you CAN try to recover some speed by using a ferricyanide (dilute) bleach step after processing if your results are too dark. You can save underexposed film that way--AGAIN at the expense of dmax.
you may want to take pictures of a face or hands or something when you test for a better reference.
actually--on second looking...the 8 minutes looks good per the greyscale
thanks, that's a lot of ideas. There are two that interest me to start with.
1. 'everyone elses times always 6 minutes. the 6 minutes is for people adding hypo probably'
Can I ask what you meant here in a discussion of Tri-X Reversal in D19, when you said of yourself using D19 to process Tri-X Super 8 :
'I used d-19 to develop --- straight d-19 for 6' about' ?
I presumed that you meant you were using it without hypo there. What EI index did you get at 6 mins when you recommended that time?
2. 'it sounds counterintuitive, but some developers need to be dliuted with water to get more power'
Yes, it does a bit. Can anyone else confirm this?
(btw, I started at 1+1 for 4mins and got very dark positives compared to 1+0 at 4mins)
SEE. It's insidious. 6 minutes should be the STARTING point. This is why forums take forever to get an answer and if someone's face to face they can say HEY what do you mean 6'...and you can clarify immediately. This is for a good reason--shorter dev times start to make fill/empty times significant--so you need a decent development time mixture for uniformity. Anyways--for TXR super 8, 6 minutes WAS working with NO hypo. Memory does say it was straight d-19--as mixed from the powder--NO HYPO. Maybe it was done at 75 degrees? For sure now 75 degrees f for processing is standard these days since the water temperature in summer goes up and it's difficult to keep 68 degrees in summer. 75 degrees has the effect of longer time at 68 degrees. Perhaps that's what is going on here. It's been 10 like years since last super 8 processing.
Last months experiments with iilford pq universal showed that dilution from 1:9 to 1:4 kept increasing in strength but from 1:4 to 1:3 to 1:2 to 1:1 got progressively weaker in their action for the same development times. D-19 was used though at 1:1 to decent results. If you're getting diluted stuff weaker, then leave it in longer and compare the results--they may be more pleasing.
the main rule is, don't listen to other people's times and exposures--they are only starting points--they have different water and may be using different temperature AND they may be overexposing or you may be underexposing--nobody's meters are the same. Nobody's cameras are the same either. Old super 8 cameras and shutter accuracy--partucluarly for single frame--that's always suspect too.
just don't get skimpy on the exposure--if ei 50 looks good to you then THATS's your speed. Box says 200...that don't mean you're doing something wrong. The 200 could be some test with results you don't find pleasing. You are doing just fine but you keep letting written numbers give you doubt. you SEE your results. too dark, your results say more development time will solve that--or more exposure--why look to what it's 'supposed to be'. You can not do anything new if you strive to get the same results of others--get the look YOU want and do what you have to do in order to get it--not matter how much you feel "cheated" on film speed. Get something that works robustly and repeatedly. Looks like your set here. If you want a more brightness or more "speed" try ferricyanide by inspection rather than hypo in the deveoper in the dark.
And say you send the film out and you're getting good results from the lab at ei 200--well, the process they use in machines cannot be duplicated with a tank easily or at all. Them machines use a fast process with hypo in the deveoper to speed up the process. The machine has WAY more control/precision than you--if you want machine results you need a machine. OR you must practice practice practice...and may never get it to work reliably.
NOTE--when all is said and done, movie film IS best done on a machine specially built to process movie film. You can't beat the machine--nobody can. If you take into consideration your time, you'll see that machine is usually winning out on cost too. BUT, it's understandable--you see others have done it and YOU want to do it. Once you get your process down it starts to turn into real work/drudgery...thatmachine starts too look very attractive--you no longer feel inadequate to have a machine do the work when you KNOW that you can do it if you have to. Still though--the movie film processing rig has not been thrown out....no matter how disused it's been...
Last edited by johnielvis; 03-12-2013 at 06:36 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I just checked the tri x reversal data sheet--the EI is 160 for tungsten--did you use continuous lighting on that? if so, you're right there. If strobe or sunlight, ok...still lacking a bit in speed. Still need speed? then try longer/hotter development till you get it. Or do a post bleach bath to your desired density BEFORE you start the hypo concoctions--you can see the bleach work and do more if not enough...the dev step, you're stuck with what you got.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
If you don't want to use a more concentrated developer and you don't want to increase time/temperature of the first dev, then trying a silver halide solvent would be easier than adding another bleach step (which implies using a clear bath after) after 2nd developer. This will reduce the density a little (which you want) creating a brighter image.
Once in the ballpark of the right amount to add (usually between 1 and 5g/L), you can even control the ''tone'' of the image. If the scene is contrasty add a little less and increase 1st dev time, if it is not contrasty enough add a little more and decrease 1st dev time.
That's what I've been learning since a few weeks and it works for me. Silver halides aren't necessary, but they can make things easier...
FERRICYANIDE BLEACH AND FIX. you can remove developed silver by inspection a little at a time till you get what you want. If you want more contrast, you can actually underexpose on purpose just to bleach later to pump up the contrast.
I'd Stay away from the hypo in the first developer....
Thanks for the encouragement, guys. I've been looking at my camera shutter speeds and reading the literature so have been quiet on this. I've come to decision on Tri-X Reversal 7266.
After work commitments I have limited time. Tri-X experiments are now becoming an impediment to my project and my pleasure. It's a drain on time and energy and not giving anything back.
I've followed the processes that other have used successfully (Rodinal and D19 for example and I also tested PQ and Polymax(Dektol) ) and just not got the results. I do believe it should be possible to replicate other's process within acceptable limits. With the speed loss i am seeing, it looks likely that I am doing something wrong but still do not know what but can't expend more time worrying about it.
Thanks both for your ideas above, but I feel that I cannot spend another two weeks testing new chemicals* and processes as a workaround to fix something that should work without – and has worked without for many people. When I used Tri-X Super 8 many years ago with the Tetenal Reversal kit it was great. It looked wonderful and worked first time and every time. Today, at this particular moment, processing Tri-X Reversal film feels like flogging a broken horse from where I am.
But I do have to develop the film myself for the pleasure (I actually enjoy it) and the process. It really needs to be part of my film work. So I'm looking at reversal films like Scala 200x and Adox Pan-X 100 to get out of this fruitless Tri-X loop, at least for the time being. I already have a cartridge of Adox Pan-X Reverso in the fridge and might run a few test strips this weekend. If that also fails then my method is wrong somewhere and I need to look at that again. If it succeeds then Pan-X might be a better short to mid term solution leaving the Tri-X Reversal mystery behind me.
(Also I have been hoping that Adox will get their Pan-X Reverso reversal kit out soon)
The speed rating of TriX Reversal is not really an issue. Tri-X is panchromatic, afaik. The dual film speed rating is surely to account for cameras which have a tungsten 85a filter built in. The Tri-X cart auto switches it out on my camera. But I'm also exposing manually with a Weston using incident reading and using 32k Bowens light.
My camera shutter speed at 18fps single frame is accurate and so is my Weston meter tested against two camera meters. So I still read my best result as 100ASA at 12mins max strength developer. So if I can only get 50-100ASA from Tri-X I might just as well use another true reversal film. One with a clear base, to boot.
*With what you explained to me and now I've read the document 'A Black&White Reversal Process In Memory Of Agfa Scala 200x' I think I'm much clearer on the silver solvent question. It's more important with low speed films. I think with a fast film like Tri-X and it's thin emulsion it only serves to make the whole image too weak at 1st dev stage.
'The amount of silver solvent needed depends on the amount of silver halide in the film and the strength of first development. In principle, lower speed films contain a higher amount of silver halide; they are more capable to build maximum densitiy in the negative. A lower amount of developer concentrate in the first developer creates a softer negative image and leaves more unused silver halide requiring more silver solvent and vice versa.'
Last edited by mr.datsun; 03-14-2013 at 09:29 PM. Click to view previous post history.
In fact b&w film is less sensitive to tungsten light than to daylight. Like Fomapan, it is 80ASA in tungsten light. It has nothing to do with 85 filter.
Originally Posted by mr.datsun
Yes but currently your film is too dark, so you want to reduce density somehow, possibly with with silver halide solvents.
Originally Posted by mr.datsun
I'm looking forward to your tests with Adox PanX !!
I read that somewhere but then I wondered why negative films do not, to my knowledge, have those same dual speed daylight/tungsten ratings?
Originally Posted by Tofek
Well, in my case even minute amounts of the silver solvent solution seemed to reduce density evenly all over the tonal range without any increase in contrast. That paper seemed to offer an explanation to me but I may be interpreting it incorrectly.
Originally Posted by Tofek
Yes, I'm looking forward to the Pan-X tests. When I have something to show, I'll post.