Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,228   Posts: 1,532,819   Online: 969
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    Somehow in my short "photographic" lifetime, I have never shot Tri-x.

    So I just picked up a few rolls of the new medium format 400TX and plan on developing it in D76 1:1 for 9 3/4 minutes at 68, as per the box and kodak website.
    I also plan on shooting it at asa 400.

    Any advice?

    Thanks.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    My experience with TriX is the 320 ISO sheet film. My tests on that film indicated that it exposes at 160 (to arrive at a .10 density above FB+fog) and that for a scene of normal luminance I expose it for 6 min 15 seconds in HC 110 dil B. These are for negatives designed for enlarging.

  3. #3
    Jorge Oliveira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Brazil
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    614
    You have to look at manufacture's data as a good starting point.
    There are lots of variables, such as your lighmeter precision, your metering technique, your termometer, etc.

    So, I would start with standard times and exposute, and then look for:

    - Is shadow detail good? If not, increase exposure (dowrate your film speed for metering).
    - Is contrast OK? If lacking, increase development time.
    - Are higlights blown up? If so, reduce your development time.

    The above shall be done over a few rolls of film, with different scenes.

    Have fun,

    Jorge O

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    963
    What Don and Jorge said. I would add, if it's your first roll, I would suggest you bracket a bit I normally rate tri-x at half the manufactuer's recommendation. there is a big difference in the tonal ranges of the printed pictures depending on if you are using tx400 or txp320. the tx400 give a long tonal range with good shadow detail and a very light gray instead of a brilliant white. txp gives a much stronger (bad word, i know) tonal range from deep black to brilliant white. with medium format, you can try both and see which you prefer.
    d76 at 1:1 is a great starting developer for either tri-x.
    Take care,
    Tom

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    405
    Images
    7
    1/2 rate the asa???? Tri-X isn't fun until at least a two stop push.. Three is better

    Who needs a flash? Not me!!

    All kidding aside if I could only use one film in my MF cameras it would be TXP 320.

    Ian

  6. #6
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    I've just posted an image in the standard gallery from today. It's a bit flat but I don't do PS very well. I'll have it in the darkroom on monday to take a look.

    I shot it at 400, developed in D76 1:1 for 9.5 minutes.

    No on camera filters used.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    368
    So I just picked up a few rolls of the new medium format 400TX and plan on developing it in D76 1:1 for 9 3/4 minutes at 68, as per the box and kodak website.
    I also plan on shooting it at asa 400.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Why this combination. D-76 is high in sod sulfite and the results won't be as sharp as a higher acutence developer. Try one of the pyro based formulae such as PMK. I woulduse an EI of 200-250.If you are worried about grain try a finer grain film like FP4+

    steve simmons
    www.cameraarts.com
    www.viewcamera.com

  8. #8
    Cheryl Jacobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,707
    Images
    211
    Why this combination. D-76 is high in sod sulfite and the results won't be as sharp as a higher acutence developer.
    Ummm, because it's a classic combination, and for good reason! I use Tri-X processed in ID-11 or D-76 1:1 almost exclusively these days. The sharpness is very good, but not harshly so (yes, for the kind of work I do, there is such a thing as too sharp). The grain is definitely present, but is soft and beautiful. It yields a wonderful glow when properly printed.

    Of course, the 'best' film/developer/paper combo is entirely dependant on how and what you shoot, and your personal preferences.

  9. #9
    dr bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Annapolis, Md
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    871
    Images
    14
    You probably won't have any "problems" using TX or TXP. I certainly go with the posters in that TX-400 is (was) my favorite, until Kodak chose to stop the 4x5 and 120 production.

    I have tried other films and keep coming back to Tri-X. It has something other films miss. The T-grain films have great linear gray scale reproduction but seem to miss something in the artistic vein. I can't explain it - I call it "heart".

    Truly, dr bob.
    I love the smell of fixer in the morning. It smells like...creativity!
    Truly, dr bob.

  10. #10
    David R Munson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    408
    Images
    5
    TX is great stuff. I found that it worked best for me at EI 200 and EI 1600, developed for 6 and 16 minutes respectively in HC-110 Dilution B at 68º F. FWIW, though, pushing TX only seems to give me results I liked in 35mm. Never quite looked right pushing it in 120.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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