Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,041   Posts: 1,560,694   Online: 1002
      
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    938
    Images
    17

    Pentax 67 + 45/4 + Tri-X 320

    Shot these right around mid-day to get a worst-case scenario with this film. 8ml of HC110, enough water to fill tank. I agitated this more than I likely should have, 8 mins of dev time. I guessed that 8ml of HC110 syrup would be more appropriate than the normal 6ml that I use for 120 (same tank/reel) to not hit depletion. I normally go for 5ml for 35mm roll, 6 for 120 and it's been fine for 20+ rolls, even at varying temperatures.

    I have a lot helping to add contrast in this set compared to what I normally shoot:

    1) Contrasty lens shot at optimum apertures (f/8-11) (My only other P67 lens, and most of my 35mm gear is single coated and '60s vintage or older)
    2) Hard shoulder on the film curve (have shot Tri-X 400 but never this 320 ASA version)
    3) 30 sec of agitation, then 10 sec every minute (vs normal 5)
    4) Less diluted developer mix (8ml for a Yankee tank instead of normal 6ml for 120 format, and negligibly less water due to amount of 220 film in same tank/reel setup vs. 120)
    5) Sunny day, around 2PM. Normally I would not take pictures at that time.

    End result, I'll try another test roll and shoot in similar conditions and try to knock down the contrast with less agitation. My end goal is to simulate and then correctly develop 3-4 rolls of this that I shot in France this summer. I used 200ASA for my metering there, figuring a slight pull would help tame contrast some.


    Is that plan flawed, as far as controlling contrast with less agitation? I need to stick with HC110 and have enough rolls of the same batch of film to experiment some, but obviously the more I can hone in each time, the better.

  2. #2
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    938
    Images
    17
    What good is a question thread without some images to go along?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails trix320testroll_0013.jpg   trix320testroll_0011.jpg   trix320testroll_0016.jpg   trix320testroll_0019.jpg   trix320testroll.jpg  


  3. #3
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,648
    Images
    60
    I'm going to assume that this is 220 film. Am I right? TXP-320 is available in both 120 and 220 lengths.

    If so, Kodak's recommendation would be for a minimum of 12 ml HC110 concentrate per roll, because a roll of 220 has twice the developer requirement of a 135-36 or 120 roll.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  4. #4
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    938
    Images
    17
    Yes, 220 format. I guess I need to test out times for higher dilutions or buy a 2x120 reel Paterson.

  5. #5
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,648
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Fixcinater View Post
    Yes, 220 format. I guess I need to test out times for higher dilutions or buy a 2x120 reel Paterson.
    I'm not sure whether I understand what you mean by "higher" dilutions.

    I would normally take that phrase to refer to more dilute solutions - relatively more water as compared to concentrate.

    But with 220 and a smallish tank, I think you may be forced to use dilutions that are more concentrated/less dilute.

    In any event, if through using relatively less concentrate you are exhausting your developer on the highlights, it will definitely complicate your contrast adjustments.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  6. #6
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    938
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    I'm not sure whether I understand what you mean by "higher" dilutions.

    I would normally take that phrase to refer to more dilute solutions - relatively more water as compared to concentrate.

    But with 220 and a smallish tank, I think you may be forced to use dilutions that are more concentrated/less dilute.

    In any event, if through using relatively less concentrate you are exhausting your developer on the highlights, it will definitely complicate your contrast adjustments.


    Yes, I meant more water compared to concentrate.


    Thank you for your thoughts. I'll continue experimenting and hopefully not run into any further complications. The whole goal of moving from D76 to HC110 was that it was supposed to be very simple (JBrunner's 1+49 methodology) and versatile.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    958
    HC-110 will become my fav developer sooenr or later, i used it twice and got great results, and i think after very long time [2 or 3 years maybe] i will go back to processing, i have 2 films i think waiting since long time for processing, will use HC-110 Dil H, will see what i can get.

    I recommend you to use one of the following films if you go with HC-110: Acros 100, TMAX 400, TMAX 100, Tri-X 400 and FP4+

  8. #8
    Fixcinater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    938
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by TareqPhoto View Post
    HC-110 will become my fav developer sooenr or later, i used it twice and got great results, and i think after very long time [2 or 3 years maybe] i will go back to processing, i have 2 films i think waiting since long time for processing, will use HC-110 Dil H, will see what i can get.

    I recommend you to use one of the following films if you go with HC-110: Acros 100, TMAX 400, TMAX 100, Tri-X 400 and FP4+
    I've used HC110 with all of those, it's been good with each and every one. Instead of messing around with the sub-dilutions and HC110 stock solution, check out JBrunner's idea here. I have basically used 8 minutes for everything I've shot and it's been great. This roll as mentioned in the OP was the first time I deviated.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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