Digital BW, The Print

I started back in photography after lay off - life got in the way. I 
primarly shoot 4x5. I used to use Tri-X but was not all that happy with 
the Tri-X/HC-110 combination I was using. Since I got back in I have 
been looking at other options. I do, however, like the "Tri-X" look. Of 
course I suspect that Tri-X has changed some in the 20 years since I 
used it. Right now I am playing around with TMax 400, but I am not sure 
I like the look of the prints produced from the film. I, however, have 
not printed any TMax negs on silver paper so I can't really compare it 
to TriX. I have scanned and printed some of my old TriX negs on Photo 
Rag and do like them - I would say better than the TMax negs but I don't 
have the same images. Many of my old TriX negs were taken when I lived 
in CO and hence the lighting and subject are much different than I have 
on the TMax so we are talking apples to oranges.

My question is what is TriX like these days and how does it compair to 
TMax and what are the developer combinations/times that work well for 
TriX. I live in FL and it is difficult to get my water below 75 degrees 
and year round it is between 75 and 80 degrees so that somewhat limits 
the developer.

Truman

Although I have switched to digital capture in the past year, what proved 
to be one of my favorite developers in the 30+ years that I did wet 
darkroom work was PMK Pyro.  In addition to being fairly economical (comes 
in 2 parts, diluted 1:2:100 water) it works well (and faster) at higher 
temperatures.  As I recall, minimum recommended temperature was 70F, and 
time was reduced 3% for each degree F above that, to a maximum of about 90F 
or so (at which point you start to have emulsion stability problems.)  It's 
not a high contrast developer, and you lose a bit of film speed (I mostly 
used Ilford films, but the little bit of Tri-X that I tried worked best at 
200 or 250 - you don't push or pull with this stuff,) but in many 
situations it gave me absolutely gorgeous 35mm and 6x6 negatives.  It is a 
staining developer, so your negatives sometimes look a little brown or even 
greenish, but the stain also tends to minimize apparent grain.

I bought pre-mixed liquid concentrate from Photographer's Formulary, as 
this avoids handling one or more of the constituent chemicals that are 
particularly nasty in dry powder form.  Do a Google search for PMK Pyro if 
you're intrigued.

At 5/17/2003 09:32 PM -0400, Truman wrote, in part:

>I started back in photography after lay off - life got in the way. I
>primarly shoot 4x5. I used to use Tri-X but was not all that happy with
>the Tri-X/HC-110 combination I was using. Since I got back in I have
>been looking at other options. I do, however, like the "Tri-X" look.  <snip>
>
>My question is what is TriX like these days and how does it compair to
>TMax and what are the developer combinations/times that work well for
>TriX. I live in FL and it is difficult to get my water below 75 degrees
>and year round it is between 75 and 80 degrees so that somewhat limits
>the developer.

Thanks Kip,

It's hard to beat TriX. I used to use PanX in with Zone VI developer in 
my RB67. The results would rival a 4x5 when printed to the same size 
print. Of course Kodak in their infinite wisdom discontinued PanX.

But I still always liked something about a TriX image produced by a 4x5. 
I just had a difficult time dealing with HC110.

I tried Rodinal but that was not all that great either. The TMax, I 
don't know, there is something that doesn't "light my fire."  I'm still 
playing around with these new (and old)  films. The problem I have with 
Kodak is they seem - they always have - to muck with their film and not 
tell us. That's one reason I started to use Ilford films at one time. 
They seem to be a bit more honest. What speeds and development times 
were you seeing with HP5?  Thanks for sharing your experience.

Truman

Kip Babington wrote:

>Although I have switched to digital capture in the past year, what proved 
>to be one of my favorite developers in the 30+ years that I did wet 
>darkroom work was PMK Pyro.  In addition to being fairly economical (comes 
>in 2 parts, diluted 1:2:100 water) it works well (and faster) at higher 
>temperatures.  As I recall, minimum recommended temperature was 70F, and 
>time was reduced 3% for each degree F above that, to a maximum of about 90F 
>or so (at which point you start to have emulsion stability problems.)  It's 
>not a high contrast developer, and you lose a bit of film speed (I mostly 
>used Ilford films, but the little bit of Tri-X that I tried worked best at 
>200 or 250 - you don't push or pull with this stuff,) but in many 
>situations it gave me absolutely gorgeous 35mm and 6x6 negatives.  It is a 
>staining developer, so your negatives sometimes look a little brown or even 
>greenish, but the stain also tends to minimize apparent grain.
>
>I bought pre-mixed liquid concentrate from Photographer's Formulary, as 
>this avoids handling one or more of the constituent chemicals that are 
>particularly nasty in dry powder form.  Do a Google search for PMK Pyro if 
>you're intrigued.
>
>  
>

Tri-X has changed somewhat (and has undergone another change very recently,
although I'm not sure what it was), but it still looks far more like Tri-X
than anything else, so it's still well worth shooting if you like the
distinctive Tri-X look.  I still shoot it.  I often like it better than
T-Max.  The spectral sensitivity and characteristic curves of Tri-X seem to
produce clearer images than more rigorously panchromatic films like T-Max,
even though I suppose T-Max more accurately reflects real-world
luminosities.  I could do without Tri-X grain, but other than that I like
the film.

I don't do anything special in development.  Just D-76 straight, adjusting
times to reflect whatever the ambient temperature is when I develop (usually
around 22\ufffd C).  However, I scan everything (no enlarger), so exact results
are not as critical for me as they might be if I planned to optically
enlarge and print the negatives.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Truman Prevatt" <tprevatt@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2003 03:32
Subject: [Digital BW] Film


> I started back in photography after lay off - life got in the way. I
> primarly shoot 4x5. I used to use Tri-X but was not all that happy with
> the Tri-X/HC-110 combination I was using. Since I got back in I have
> been looking at other options. I do, however, like the "Tri-X" look. Of
> course I suspect that Tri-X has changed some in the 20 years since I
> used it. Right now I am playing around with TMax 400, but I am not sure
> I like the look of the prints produced from the film. I, however, have
> not printed any TMax negs on silver paper so I can't really compare it
> to TriX. I have scanned and printed some of my old TriX negs on Photo
> Rag and do like them - I would say better than the TMax negs but I don't
> have the same images. Many of my old TriX negs were taken when I lived
> in CO and hence the lighting and subject are much different than I have
> on the TMax so we are talking apples to oranges.
>
> My question is what is TriX like these days and how does it compair to
> TMax and what are the developer combinations/times that work well for
> TriX. I live in FL and it is difficult to get my water below 75 degrees
> and year round it is between 75 and 80 degrees so that somewhat limits
> the developer.
>
> Truman

Truman, I had the same experience.  TMax 100 in TMax RS 1:9 from the bottle,
in a rotary processor, gave excellent negs.  It is very linear, and due to
its reciprocity characteristics is much faster than TriX in low light
situations.  But...I just didn't like it as well as TriX.  I have processed
TriX pro (4x5) in HC110 1:15 from stock and D76 1:1 with success.  I never
did care for TMax 400.  I have not noticed any particular change in TriX
pro.  TriX 400, a completely different film not available in LF so far as I
know, is being made on a different line now and is supposed to have finer
grain.  My solution for now, when I use the field cameras, is to carry TriX
mostly and some TMax 100 for low-light situations.

I have also developed both films in PMK pyro and Rollo pyro, but that is for
alt printing -- I don't recommend it for scanning.  Regarding the water
temp, you might look into getting a Jobo processor.  I haven't done it, but
I believe you can put ice in the water bath and the temp control (heat) on
the Jobo will then keep the solutions at say 68.  Also -- both of these
films give excellent results in very high contrast (say "N-4") by developing
in a very dilute situation of HC110 or TMax RS until exhaustion.  Although I
have no personal experience with it, Cachet AB55 is supposed to be useable
at temps from 65 to 85.   If you need them, I have charts for the
development of both these films at various levels of compression and
expansion, as a starting point, compensating development, as well as
detailed reciprocity charts for both films.  Hope this helps.

  --Ken


----- Original Message -----
From: "Truman Prevatt" <tprevatt@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 8:32 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Film


> I started back in photography after lay off - life got in the way. I
> primarly shoot 4x5. I used to use Tri-X but was not all that happy with
> the Tri-X/HC-110 combination I was using. Since I got back in I have
> been looking at other options. I do, however, like the "Tri-X" look. Of
> course I suspect that Tri-X has changed some in the 20 years since I
> used it. Right now I am playing around with TMax 400, but I am not sure
> I like the look of the prints produced from the film. I, however, have
> not printed any TMax negs on silver paper so I can't really compare it
> to TriX. I have scanned and printed some of my old TriX negs on Photo
> Rag and do like them - I would say better than the TMax negs but I don't
> have the same images. Many of my old TriX negs were taken when I lived
> in CO and hence the lighting and subject are much different than I have
> on the TMax so we are talking apples to oranges.
>
> My question is what is TriX like these days and how does it compair to
> TMax and what are the developer combinations/times that work well for
> TriX. I live in FL and it is difficult to get my water below 75 degrees
> and year round it is between 75 and 80 degrees so that somewhat limits
> the developer.
>
> Truman
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Hello Truman,

>My question is what is TriX like these days and how does it compair
>to TMax and what are the developer combinations/times that work well
>for TriX. I live in FL and it is difficult to get my water below 75 
>degrees and year round it is between 75 and 80 degrees so that 
>somewhat limits the developer.

I'm a Tri-X user too, and also live in Florida (WPB).  I shoot mostly
6x7, with some 6x6 and 35mm.  I keep jars of water in the fridge and
mix it with tap water to get the 68F.

For several years I tried most of the new BW films that came along but
always kept coming back to Tri-X.  I finally quit wasting time and
stuck with Tri-X.  T-Max in particular I didn't like because of its
"creamy" look.  Ugh.  I shoot 400 Tri-X at 200 and the 320 Pro stuff
(not as nice IMO) at 180.

My favorite results are from very dilute HC-110.  I use 5/8 oz to 30
oz water (2-reel tank - I use 30 oz to leave room for good air
movement durig agit; otherwise uneven development) at 68F.  One shot,
I stir it in a few ozs of tap water until dissolved, then add cold
from the jar with a dial thermometer - instant response.  Develop 5.5
minutes with gentle agit every 30 secs.  Increase/decrease time a bit
to push/pull.  Wonderful sharp, clear classic Tri-X look.  

I did some experiments some years ago and kept diluting the HC-110
more and more to see how far it could go.  Was amazed at the good
results and reduced grain at that much dilution.  This ratio was the
magic point.  Also gives you more rolls from one bottle.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

>>  Right now I am playing around with TMax 400, but I am not sure
>> I like the look of the prints produced from the film.

Better choices for developing Tmax can be made, compared to D-76 or HC110
IMHO, and this is especially true for portraiture.  Try Xtol.  Full temp
charts are available on EK web site.  As long as it has at least five
minutes in the soup you will get good results.  I would say from my
experience that Tmax in Xtol is a relatively good match for for the look of
Tri-X in HC110B in the mid-tones, of course the difference between the films
is the extended linear highlight sensitivity of Tmax compared to the
relatively flat shoulder of Tri-X.  Tmax is much more sensitive to correct
exposure and cannot tolerate any over-exposure, so if your highlights are
flat there is the problem.

Tom Robinson

A bit off the path but, are there any favorite places to order film 
from. B&W, 35mm or 120. Illford, Bergger,etc.
John H

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mr_Misty_44" 
<jharvey@i...> wrote:
> A bit off the path but, are there any favorite places to order 
film 
> from. B&W, 35mm or 120. Illford, Bergger,etc.
> John H

My choices are B&H, Adorama and Freestyle's Arista housebrand which 
is supposed to be cut and repackaged bulk Ilford.

Andrew

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mr_Misty_44" 
<jharvey@i...> wrote:
> A bit off the path but, are there any favorite places to order 
film 
> from. B&W, 35mm or 120. Illford, Bergger,etc.
> John H

If you need unusual sizes or simply want to experiment, JC Photo is 
importing the Efke line of films and a few other interesting things:

http://www.jandcphotography.com/

Steve