Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,690   Posts: 1,548,829   Online: 1046
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    south central Missouri
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    9
    I either use 510 pyro continuous on Beseler base (like how it treats clouds on landscapes) or HC110 stand.

    Tri-x 400.

    Mike

  2. #12
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    When I used Tri-X a lot, it was using it the classic zone system way explained in "The Negative". For me, the 320 variety ended up being shot at EI 200 in D-76 1:1 at 72F (seemed to be my average water temperature at the time of the testing, so I stuck with it) in both 4x5 and 120/220. I used a time-temp chart if the water was not 72F. I used the combo for everything black and white, pretty much, except sometimes I used FP4 when I wanted its different contrast and color response characteristics. (Strangely enough, it also tested as an EI 200 film for me, so Tri-X had no real speed advantage - just a malleability advantage and less contrast.) For Tri-X 400, it was in 135 format, so I would be hand held 99.9% of the time, often without a meter, and often with an incident meter rather than a spot meter. Thus, I used EIs 125, 250, 500, 1000, etc. to conveniently match shutter speeds (or 100, 200, 500, 1000 for the Leica or similar cameras with the old shutter speeds). I considered 250 normal for a normal contrast situation. I would rerate and alter development depending on contrast, though it was never tested in a detailed manner like with the 320 film. This was also in D-76 1:1 used at ambient temperature.

    Then I started messing around with HC-110 and HP5. My school had HC-110 for free, and my box of photo paper had come with three rolls of HP5. I found HP5 a better film for most of my pix, though Tri-X certainly has its unique look that is great for some things. Tri-X opens up the shadows and lightens plants and skies slightly more than HP5. So, I ended up retesting HP5, FP4, Pan F, and Delta 3200, all in Ilfotec HC, and that is where I have been for a few years now. I still shoot Tri-X when I want a 220 b/w film or when I want that Tri-X look. I use D-76 and all my times from before, but do a quick combined EI/normal development test for every new batch that I get. After everything, I highly prefer the HC to D-76. It is extremely convenient (though D-76 is a bit cheaper if used to its full capacity - but I used it diluted one shot), and most of all, more consistent and versatile than D-76. One I tested everything with it, I got almost no variation batch to batch, and also got better results with my litho film. It is ever so slightly more contrasty in the highlights than D-76, and this affect the midtones as well. I usually like this, but if ever I don't want it, all I have to do is dilute the developer so I have more fine control during development. D-76 can do anything and do it well, but I prefer HC as an all around developer.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 03-25-2009 at 05:10 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Plymouth. UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,401
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by andrewh973 View Post
    Hi Everyone,

    I'd like to solicit postings describing your favorite Tri-X (120) film-developer combinations (whether it be 320 or 400), and why. Also, please describe if it's for portraiture, landscape, etc.

    Thanks.
    Although I have tried Tri-X 400 film, it`s not one I use regularly. When I did, I used D-76 and the results were very pleasing. I`m sure other developers will work well too.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    680
    I get better negs when I rate Tri-X at 200 vs 400 with D-76 1:1 or 250 with XTOL 1:1. with Ilford's agitation recommendations. For the few times I use Rodinal I rate the film at 160. Rodinal is slower than D-76 and can sag the midtones.

    Derating Tri-X moves the toe closer to the strait line slope and opens up the shadows.
    RJ

  5. #15
    Andrew Horodysky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    220
    Thanks everyone, for your input.

  6. #16
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,298
    Images
    302
    I use Edwal 12. Wonderful film/developer combination for making prints. Not very different from D76, but with a bit more brilliance in the highlights and finer grain.

    D76 and Tri-X is a classic and a beautiful combination. This, I think, is even better.

    Kit available from the Photographer's Formulary.

    - Thomas
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    743
    Images
    28
    In Europe in the winter, I used to use TriX (120) shot at EI1000 and developed in Diafine. I found this to be a great combination.

    Back here in better lit New Zealand, TriX at EI400 in PC-TEA works really well.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2
    I have just run some tests again (getting back into film for some nourishment) - Tri X rated at 400 in Xtol 1:1 developed for 9 mins and 15 seconds is giving a good result. I used to get up to a stop extra speed out of this combination, but 400 will do seeing it's giving a nice tonal range.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2
    Oops - I'm shooting 35mm but about to run some tests on my old Rolleiflex as well. It will be Xtol again. Tri X and Xtol really is a wonderful combination once you get it right.

  10. #20
    Henry Alive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    189
    Images
    63
    I usually shoot with TX400, EI200, HC110, 1:47, 6 minutes. It works fine for me.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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