Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,876   Posts: 1,520,254   Online: 1107

I developed my first

  1. Pfiltz
    Roll of film ever today. Shot my first roll of film last week or so. 120 Tri-x 400 is what I shot and developed today. Now I have to buy a scanner I think to really be able to see how I'm doing.

    I think I'm going to like shooting with my RB67
  2. Polovy
    Polovy
    Or get an enlarger... and make an enlargement!
  3. Pfiltz
    Pfiltz
    I'm not getting good results from my developing it seems... I'm shooting Tri-X 400, and so far, all of my scan's show a lot or it seems to me, a lot of grain. It's the only film I've shot so far, and the only one developed myself. So far, all 4 rolls seem to be very grainy. Hoping to shoot some 100 speed film this week, and see if it's my developing techniques or just the film. The film is new film as well.
  4. Bob_
    Bob_
    what did you do to it? process etc?
  5. Pfiltz
    Pfiltz
    Hi Bob,,,

    I'm using D-76

    My routine.

    Roll film in a dark room, onto Patterson Reels
    Load film in container
    Add developer, start timer for 6.5 minutes
    4 inversions top of every minute
    Dump developer after 6.5 minutes
    Add Stop for .30 seconds doing light inversions during the .30 seconds.
    Dump Stop
    Add Fix for 5 minutes. 2 inversions top of every minute.
    Dump Fix
    Rinse with water for 3 minutes
    Squeegee film
    Hang to dry
  6. John Lapp
    John Lapp
    Three things occur to me. You didn't mention the developer temperature. Higher temperatures can build grain. Is your developer close to 20 degrees C? You didn't mention a pre-soak. This is controversial, but I have always given my film a minute or two soak in water at the development temperature. Third, your agitation sounds a bit aggressive to me. You might be better off with a single, gentle inversion every 15 seconds rather than four at once each minute. I hope this helps.
  7. Pfiltz
    Pfiltz
    Thanks..

    I do have a thermometer that another photographer used. I'm developing at 68 degree's F.

    I have tried a pre soak on one of the rolls.

    I really think it's an agitation situation if I had to guess, and just not used to seeing my work in Tri-X 400 speed film

    I'm shooting some 100 speed color film this weekend, but will have a lab process it for me, since I don't have the chemicals.
  8. Bertil
    Bertil
    Hi Pflitz, now some time ago, but OK.
    Tri-X has a grain character of it own, that's at least one feature of this famous film that explains why some people LOVE Tri-x!
    You don't like grain (?).
    Well, I don't think that the agitaion pattern you describe is responsible of the grain you don't like – unless your negatives are very contrasty; but I doubt that in view of your description above. But you seem to judge the grain from the scanning results; I think you should judge grain from a proper print!
    If you don't like the Tri-x grain, try Kodak T-max 400 (or Ilford Delta 400).
    If you really can see the the grain on a 8x10 print from a 6x7 fresh T-max 400 negative, developed at 20° C for 6.5 minutes in D-76 (agitate as you want!), the Print must be Very Very hard, a Very Very contrasty print, really Black and White! Print it softer and the grain disappears – that's my experience!
    Best wishes
    /Bertil
  9. Gzukoff
    Gzukoff
    I recently developed a roll of Tri-X and GPS-3 and they both seemed extremely soft and grainy. The Tri-X in Caffenol C-L and the Shanghai PaRodinal both with an hour stand development. THe Tri-X with moderate agitation and the GPS-3 with only 3 agitations through the whole 70 minutes. With the stand development, its supposed to reduce grain to a minimum. I scanned the negs (as I dont have my enlarger setup yet) and think this "graininess" may be pixelation from the scanner, not graininess of the film. Looking at the negs through a loupe they look fine.

    Just my 2 cents
  10. Gary 5063
    Gary 5063
    If your intention is to shoot black and white film and scan it, you are likely to be very unhappy with not only Tri-X, but with most, if not all, conventional black and white films.
    Try a chromogenic film like Ilford XP-2. You're likely to be far happier. Scanners do a much better job with dye images than they do with silver images.
  11. Bertil
    Bertil
    Gary, I think it's a question of scanning technic dealing with conventional B/W film.
    Scanning in 16-bits grey scale, adjusting the black and white ends of the input histogram and output between 0-255 gives at least me (Epson 4870) very nice scans after adjusting contrast with levels and curves - hard to make proper prints that nice!
    /Bertil
  12. Pfiltz
    Pfiltz
    Well, a lot of changes, for the better. I've got my developing technique down pat now I think, and I've found that fresh chemicals make all the difference in the world too...

    I've moved away from Tri-X for a while, and am shooting Arista. Better yet, I've moved from 120 to 4x5.

    I now own a Graphlex Graphic View Camera, and have a darkroom setup in the studio. My darkroom is very crude looking compared to those I see here, but it's functional.

    Been printing now for around 3 weeks. I LOVE IT! I'm hooked. I've only been printing 5x7's and moving into using filters too, which I really like.

    I've been printing on some Ilford MGIV FB and RC paper. I just won some Ebay auctions on some Kodak 8x10 paper as well. Can't wait to print on some of that.

    I don't have enough wall space for the prints I have now, but man, I'm having fun.
Results 1 to 12 of 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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