Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,765   Posts: 1,484,088   Online: 971
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 60
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    950
    Ryuji Suzuki has some info about D-76 history and some variations at:

    http://silvergrain.org/wiki/D-76

    If you're really fascinated, Richard Knoppow wrote a long post in pure-silver about the early days of developing movie film in D-76 and variants. I might be able to find a copy if anyone is interested. Apparently the optical sound track was very sensitive to developer characteristics, and inaccuracies caused sound distortion.

  2. #12
    pierods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by john_s View Post
    Ryuji Suzuki has some info about D-76 history and some variations at:

    http://silvergrain.org/wiki/D-76

    If you're really fascinated, Richard Knoppow wrote a long post in pure-silver about the early days of developing movie film in D-76 and variants. I might be able to find a copy if anyone is interested. Apparently the optical sound track was very sensitive to developer characteristics, and inaccuracies caused sound distortion.
    I am interested!

  3. #13
    pierods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by nworth View Post
    D-76 has been D-76 since the 1920s. There was no change. Kodak has changed Tri-X many times, generally improving it in subtle ways. It should be noted that for the past many years there have been two, quite different Tri-X films. The first is what is now known as 400TX, available in rolls and 35 mm. This film has a straight-line curve. The other film was called Tri-X Professional and is now known as 320-Tri-X. This film has a pronounced toe, and is recommended for controlled lighting conditions. The earliest record I have for a film called Kodak Tri-X comes from the late 1940s. That was a sheet film with a speed of ASA 160 (old system, near 400 in the current system). In the mid-1950s a new Tri-X became available in 35mm and rolls. It had an ANSI speed of 400 (current system) and was pretty grainy. It could be pushed reliably to 800. This is the precursor of the current 400TX, and had many of the same characteristics. Kodak has made changes to this film about every two or three years. Grain has been reduced until now it is very fine, and there have been subtle improvements to latitude and gradations.
    So the gist of it is that if I buy a roll of 400 tri-x today, I will be able to get the same results as a photographer would in the early 70s, with some darkroom tweaks, right?

  4. #14
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by pierods View Post
    So the gist of it is that if I buy a roll of 400 tri-x today, I will be able to get the same results as a photographer would in the early 70s, with some darkroom tweaks, right?
    ******
    Yes, and I am not sure it would take much "tweaking."
    For sure,(based upon my experience) a Tr-X neg from Rodinal appeared somewhat different from one developed in sulfited Rodinal; or Tri-X in Microdol; from a neg done in D23; but my advice is to look for other aspects of Sief's images in your attempts to emulate his "style." Once you have taught yourself how to achieve that "look," then you can develop a style of your own and acquire your own visual voice. Have fun.

    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    526
    Hi !
    I've read, in a book written by Mr Eaton IIRC, that D76 has changed many times because the original formula gained activity upon storage.
    This phenomenon was weird and nobody known why. So they first changed the accelerator many times until the chemistry of hydroquinone copound where better known and this lead to the 50's formula. After that time, they changed components to reduce costs, and then to get the "one can" working.
    So maybe D76 is D76 since the 20's, but it has evolved a lot ....

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,723
    Images
    65
    I would have to temper your enthusiasm again with the comment that although D-76 is the same, the film has changed considerably. New addenda and new hardener just for starters, as I mentioned earlier.

    PE
    Last edited by Sean; 04-12-2008 at 05:22 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: prior agreements regarding certain commentary

  7. #17
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,723
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgesGiralt View Post
    Hi !
    I've read, in a book written by Mr Eaton IIRC, that D76 has changed many times because the original formula gained activity upon storage.
    This phenomenon was weird and nobody known why. So they first changed the accelerator many times until the chemistry of hydroquinone copound where better known and this lead to the 50's formula. After that time, they changed components to reduce costs, and then to get the "one can" working.
    So maybe D76 is D76 since the 20's, but it has evolved a lot ....
    Eaton is correct and the same thing happens with Dektol. Activity goes up then down just as he documents. D-76 did the same in the very early days. They both still do but at reduced rates and the changes were such that the developer retained its original properties. As you say, this was done in the 50s and since then the formula has been stable except for the change from Calgon due to the fact that Calgon changed their formula.

    PE
    Last edited by Photo Engineer; 04-04-2008 at 09:07 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: spelling

  8. #18
    pierods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    I would have to temper your enthusiasm again with the comment that although D-76 is the same, the film has changed considerably. New addenda and new hardener just for starters, as I mentioned earlier.

    Also, the works by Knoppow have some errors in them as do the works of Ryuji Suzuki. You may wish to confirm this elsewhere on APUG by other posters than myself. The problem is not one of intent, but really the fact that they have not spent a lifetime studying the subject, nor do they have a group of friends that can be drawn upon to help me answer esoteric questions.

    PE
    Could you elaborate on how the film has changed?

    What I'm trying to achieve is the same look as tri-x from the early '70s.

    So if we are talking about incremental improvements, ok, but if we're talking about a totally different look, then I would like to know what film approaches that look.

    thanks

    piero

  9. #19
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,723
    Images
    65
    Well, Piero, I posted it earlier in this thread. The old film had an organo metallic salt in it (among several) and this was replaced. The old emulsion was a single polydisperse emulsion that was noodle washed, but the new emulsion IIRC is a blend of more monodisperse emulsions that are UF washed. The film is coated with a new hardener instead of formaldehyde + muchochloric acid hardener. Due to improvements in sulfur+gold finishes and supersensitiziation, the new film is finer grained for the same speed, and due to the use of acutance dyes in the emulsion it is sharper.

    So, to duplicate that film, you would have to virtually make it yourself or search for an ISO 200 - 400 film from 3rd tier manufacturers that suit your criteria. Neither Kodak, Fuji nor Ilford make films precisely as they did back in the 70s or earlier due mostly to pollution (environmental) concerns and advances in technology.

    You are asking to buy a car from the 1920s today, and even if they reproduced the look, there would be differences as some components are just not available!

    PE

  10. #20
    pierods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Well, Piero, I posted it earlier in this thread. The old film had an organo metallic salt in it (among several) and this was replaced. The old emulsion was a single polydisperse emulsion that was noodle washed, but the new emulsion IIRC is a blend of more monodisperse emulsions that are UF washed. The film is coated with a new hardener instead of formaldehyde + muchochloric acid hardener. Due to improvements in sulfur+gold finishes and supersensitiziation, the new film is finer grained for the same speed, and due to the use of acutance dyes in the emulsion it is sharper.

    So, to duplicate that film, you would have to virtually make it yourself or search for an ISO 200 - 400 film from 3rd tier manufacturers that suit your criteria. Neither Kodak, Fuji nor Ilford make films precisely as they did back in the 70s or earlier due mostly to pollution (environmental) concerns and advances in technology.

    You are asking to buy a car from the 1920s today, and even if they reproduced the look, there would be differences as some components are just not available!

    PE
    Actually I'm just asking to buy a car that looks like the '20s.

    Anyhow thanks for the detailed specifications (I liked the noodle-washed part, I'm from Italy), and I'm sure today's film, having improved so much, can be scanned and photoshopped into compliance with the old film.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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