Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,556   Posts: 1,545,055   Online: 942
      
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 87

Thread: TMAX XTOL

  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    460
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I develop at 25c because my CPE-2 can raise but not lower the temperature and in summer my solutions are about that temperature at ambient. I can't tell any difference between these negatives and those developed cooler as long as I adjust times to give the same contrast.

    This is, though, with different developers and ice heard this "don't use warm Rodinal" before too. It might be a reason Rodinal wouldn't be a good developer for me.
    Hi Roger, I thought the CPE-2 has two-way adjustment, whereas the CPA-2 can only heat up. But I am open for education on this point. One possible avenue is to look at aquarists' temperature control systems. There might be a dual temperature controller available for cold-water fish that costs less than the typical film processor. A simple answer for small tanks might be a Peltier cooler. I haven't seen one, but it should not be too difficult to make.

    Tropical developers AFAIK were created specifically for warm ambient conditions to avoid the sort of problems that warm Rodinal would create. On the mechanisms involved, I have little insight. Essentially, as I understand, at colder temperatures the developer doesn't make grain smaller, but prevents grain clumping that would increase the apparent graininess. Grain development and grain clumping are two separate processes. Solvent developers dissolve some of the silver and then deposit it elsewhere. These are not linear processes, and for that reason they are temperature sensitive. Or to rephrase, they consist of multiple processes that have different kinetic dependency on temperature, so one can by changing the temperature change the extent to which a particular process happens/dominates. In reality it is probably a lot more complex than that still.

    I agree that Rodinal is maybe not the best choice for you. But it does depend on how grain averse you are, and what film and format you shoot.

  2. #22
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    You should also just consider Tri-X in XTOL 1+1.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #23
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Croubie View Post
    Now the question, do I stick with my Tmax/TriX + Xtol (which I at least know works well), or would my new bag of Microphen give worse/same/better results than the Xtol for pushing?
    (And should I ditch the Rodinal stand and use Xtol for slow-speeds too?)
    I'd drop all the stand stuff but I definitely wouldn't drop Rodinal out of the picture and absolutely do not drop it out of the picture when using APX100 - it's mate is Rodinal 1+50/1+100. Now for the others, sure use XTOL 1+1, but Rodinal provides a different look, and it's not really objectionable. Don't pay so much attention to the grain.

    As others have mentioned, Acros and HC-110 don't play well together. This probably has something to do with HC-110s propensity for upward swept curves and Acros' already punchy highlights. Misbalanced combination.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #24
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,273
    Images
    148
    I have to agree with Clayne, the APX100/Rodinal combination gives superb results very fine grain, sharpness and excellent tonality (detail in shadows and highlights), Tmax100 in Rodinal gives very similar results at 50EI (same development times).

    Having said that the results from replenished Xtol and APX100/Tmax100 (50EI) are equally as good, better than D76/ID-11.

    If you use Xtol replenished it's a superb all round developer, personally I'd use it at 1+2 if I had to use it one shot (and have done), although manufacturers give times for FS, 1+1 & 1+3 some of us find that developers like Xtol, ID-11/D76, Perceptol give the best balance of sharpness, fine grain, tonal range and film speed at 1+2 and it's a little more economic than 1+1 which is a bonus.

    It's worth looking at Kodaks comparison chart, Xtol gives the best results, D76 lags but HC110 is the worst in terms of grain etc

    Ian

  5. #25
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by dorff View Post
    Hi Roger, I thought the CPE-2 has two-way adjustment, whereas the CPA-2 can only heat up. But I am open for education on this point. One possible avenue is to look at aquarists' temperature control systems...

    ...

    I agree that Rodinal is maybe not the best choice for you. But it does depend on how grain averse you are, and what film and format you shoot.
    You are think of the CPP not the CPE which I have. It's the small model.

    I'm happy with my results with D76 and T-Max RS. Xtol worked fine back when I tried it too but didn't do anything that special for me and I don't care for 5 liter powder mixes.

    Worse heresy is that I've tried Rodinal in years past and was never able to get results I like with it. I have some to try again, probably inversion not rotary and I may have to limit that to winter.

  6. #26
    stevebarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    lake worth FL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    134
    Images
    5
    First roll drying. They look way under developed. I used massive dev chart. TMax 400 in XTOL 1:2 (4oz stock, 8oz water) 78* 6:41 agitate first 60 sec then 10 sec every min.

    Mixed part A into a gallon of water, then mixed part B, then topped off to make 5 liters of stock.

    Split into 1 litter bottles.

    I will post a scan when they dry.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
    steve barry
    my stuff

  7. #27
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,017
    Images
    4
    Good luck.

    I am certainly not an expert in any sense of the word here but I have been using D76 1:1 developing TMX100 for 9 and one half minutes at 20 C. Works terrific for me for a long time and I have no complaints whatsoever. But, if I have learned anything I have learned that there are many different ways to develop a negative and I am sure you will have great success with XTOL.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    460
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    You are think of the CPP not the CPE which I have. It's the small model.

    I'm happy with my results with D76 and T-Max RS. Xtol worked fine back when I tried it too but didn't do anything that special for me and I don't care for 5 liter powder mixes.

    Worse heresy is that I've tried Rodinal in years past and was never able to get results I like with it. I have some to try again, probably inversion not rotary and I may have to limit that to winter.
    Thanks for the clarification!

    I don't think Rodinal is a good developer for rotary processors. The main reason to use Rodinal is to get accutance, and that requires minimal agitation. With continuous agitation, the negatives will be flat and dull.

    Back to the OP, though: I think it is better to change one thing at a time, if something bothers you. If HC-110 and Acros didn't work (for good reason), then why not stick with HC-110 and try TMax100 or Delta 100? Or alternatively, stick with Acros and use a compensating developer. In my view Acros is a very fine film, and is the most affordable in 120 format at the moment, although the difference is not big and certainly not that important considering all other expenses. Developers such as Rodinal and HC-110 that can be used one-shot are very attractive to me, because it is far quicker to get the temperature of the water correct prior to mixing in developer, than getting pre-mixed stock solution to where it needs to be by immersion in cold or warm water baths. If you have perfect temperature control, that should not matter, but for me it is a great time saver. Apart from that, those developers last very long, and give fine results if used in the right combinations.

    As I've said before, Rodinal at 1:50 with Acros gives me very good results. I don't do stand development, as I cannot control the temperature well enough over that period, and we have very widely fluctuating ambient temperatures. 1:50 is a good compromise that gives good results. By all means try Xtol too. I would be very curious about your impression comparing let's say Acros developed in Xtol, and in Rodinal. Only if you have any inclination towards such a comparison, of course.

    EDIT: I forgot to mention that Acros in Caffenol can produce very good results too. It would also give you a useful speed boost over Rodinal or HC-110. You'll have to experiment to find the best set of variables, becuase Caffenol is an "unofficial" developer. But it certainly works very well.

  9. #29
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by stevebarry View Post
    First roll drying. They look way under developed. I used massive dev chart. TMax 400 in XTOL 1:2 (4oz stock, 8oz water) 78* 6:41 agitate first 60 sec then 10 sec every min.

    Mixed part A into a gallon of water, then mixed part B, then topped off to make 5 liters of stock.

    Split into 1 litter bottles.
    If you're just starting out with a new film and XTOL, or XTOL in general, stick to 1+1 or 1+0. 6:41 seems short for 1+2, but then again I see you used the XTOL temperature compensation of 10.5*e(-0.045*(78-68)) = 6.69 = 6:41.

    I'd stick with 1+1 times for now until you've got things dialed in.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  10. #30
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,734
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by stevebarry View Post
    First roll drying. They look way under developed. I used massive dev chart.
    There are so many variables that anybodies recommendation is simply a starting point.

    Like clayne, I would suggest a thicker mix, 1:1 or straight to start, or better yet replenished.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin