In 35mm I mostly only shoot black and white when the light is low enough I need my faster lenses. If 1250-1600 is fast enough, it's Tri-X in Diafine. If I need faster it's TMZ in T-Max, at 3200 or 6400.
120, depending on the light:
FP4+, D76 1+1
Tri-X, T-Max RS
Delta 3200, T-Max
TMY-2, T-Max RS
I like Fuji Neopan 400 with Kodak D76 -
Plus X with D76 in 35mm, T-Max 100 also in D76 in 120. Only reason, they are easy to get and have fine grain and slow speed.
I really like homemade beutler and parodinal, they are cheap and I can get the ingredients easily in chemical store except metol for beutler.
But so far, Lucky SHD 100 + parodinal 1:60 semi stand dev is my favourite. I love TriX + Beutler 1:1:8 but I cannot get it as easy as Lucky.
Originally Posted by Roger Cole
How is the Diafine + Tri-X combination? Is ISO 1250 a true speed, or do you lose a lot of shadow detail? How would you compare the results to a native high speed emulsion such as D3200 in a traditional developer?
And the sign said, "long haired freaky people need not apply"
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I'm only 35mm right now, I played around last year fairly randomly with film but not so much developers and this year have settled primarily on;
TriX/Tmax100 in Tmax developer
*I shoot both primarily at box speed though recently I pushed some TriX to 1600 with acceptable results.
This year's experiment has been playing around with Rodinal 1:50 lately and really like it with Tmax 100 in particular. I also just ordered some Xtol particularly for pushing TriX. Oh and also I've gotten into shooting Arista Premium 400 as a substitute for TriX, I don't see a difference in the results but I do notice a difference in handling when I'm putting them on a spool. TriX seems less 'slick'.... does that make any sense?
Neopan 400 and X-Tol 1:1
^ I used to love this combination. It's a shame Fuji discontinued this film in 120.
There is a lot of argument about how "real" the film speed is. I'll leave that to those with densitometers. I think it looks better (certainly a lot finer grained and thus more "normal" looking) then TMZ or Delta 3200 at those speeds. Shadow detail at least appears pretty normal, and contrast is quite normal, one of the results of a two bath developer. I used this combo a LOT back in high school and early college, partly because it was effectively fast and partly because it was cheap! The stuff lasts a very, very long time. Just keep running film through it, filter if it gets dirty. It eventually wears out, in spite of what the carton says, but I used to get 50-70 35mm rolls through a quart. It's also very easy. 3 minutes for most films, 4 for some, in each bath, with no practical effect of temperature or longer times as long as the minimums are observed. The box says 70F-85F and I've used pretty much any ambient temperature from 70-78 or so with no discernible differences, same time - you can also do different films together as the times are all the same.
Originally Posted by waltereegho
It looks good enough that I often preferred Plus-X at 400 in Diafine to native Tri-X, but it certainly isn't to everyone's taste. The box says 1600 for Tri-X and with some meters I've had that works fine, but with my current cameras I find 1250 better. I also have noticed recently that it seems to lose more speed under tungsten light than it did in the old days, so maybe give it another 1/3 stop to 1000.
I have several rolls shot this way that I just developed. When I get around to printing from them I can offer examples.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.
~Antoine de Saint-Exupery