Starting points for processing expired Tri-X 320 ??

[Maross396]

Picked up some 10 year expired TriX and looking for some guidance from the experts, I will be developing using Stearman press and either XTol/rodinal or HC110. Any idea as to tried and true times that work with any of these combos and it seems most are rating this at 160?? Thanks

[Kevin Crisp]

Depends how it has been stored, of course. But I'm shooting 10 year old TriX these days and developing it normally in HC110. There is just a little increase to B+F. My times tray developing won't translate to your tank. But ballpark around 5.5M at 68F at Dilution of one once of syrup (or new runny stuff) to 45 oz of water should be very close to right.

[Kino]

I would rate and develop "normally". If you don't have a baseline reference, what will you be comparing it to?

Let's say you rate it 160 and process it some non-standard time and you get highly dense negatives. What did that tell you? Not much.

Rate it normal, process it in the mid-range of the suggested times of a developer you are familiar with and go from there. Shoot a test negative with a good range of values from deep shade to highlights and then LOOK at the negative. Does it do what you want it to do? The negative will tell you where to go.

[Mark Sampson]

My recent experience with long-outdated TXP is that you will lose some speed due to fog; how much can be found by a simple exposure series. I was pleased to find that 'normal' development worked quite well.
For anecdotal purposes only- my TXP expired in 1974 and an EI of about 32 worked best. Your results will almost certainly vary.

[monochromeFan]

Just how much do you have of it though, number of sheets wise. In some ways to do what most of the old time books call "a proper testing of film", you could easily end up using 20-40 sheets of film.

Or just go about it in an amateur way, get that scene as described elsewhere, shoot it 1 time at box speed, 1 time each at reduced speeds, and process everything at box speed in rodinal.

[Fred L]

Going through my last sheets of 8x10 dated 2013, rating it 320 and processing normally. A sheet run through a lab's Colenta, and processed in my Jobo with Pyrocat HD look basically identical, save for the stain. Lab noticed that there was little if any extra base fog. Film was stored in basement. Mostly coolish temps.

[jnantz]

Picked up some 10 year expired TriX and looking for some guidance from the experts, I will be developing using Stearman press and either XTol/rodinal or HC110. Any idea as to tried and true times that work with any of these combos and it seems most are rating this at 160?? Thanks

you might expose it at box speed and your HC110 supposedly that's good for expired film ( I've never used it so I'm not sure the dilution though ). if you have any print developer lying around
you might give D72 or Ansco130 a try too, put about 20cc /1L in your stock XTOL, and don't look back, better yet ditch the XTOL and make some cheep caffenol C with table spoons and put your print developer in that ( with the D72/130 ) or just put it directly in the D72 or ansco130 1:6 for about 6-7 mins, or if you are contact printing on silver chloride 8.5. mins, your results might be better than you imagined. (D72 and A130 make snappy negatives )

[nolindan]

My experience with 10 year old film (that's still pretty young in my book) is to expose and develop normally. You might lose a bit of shadow speed and so Rodinal would be the worst choice of the three developers you mentioned - you would just lose more speed. I would go with Xtol. For very old film (think c. 1973 Verichrome Pan) HC-110 is generally held to be the best.

[Kevin Crisp]

"Just how much do you have of it though, number of sheets wise. In some ways to do what most of the old time books call "a proper testing of film", you could easily end up using 20-40 sheets of film.

Or just go about it in an amateur way, get that scene as described elsewhere, shoot it 1 time at box speed, 1 time each at reduced speeds, and process everything at box speed in rodinal."

I guess I missed the "old time" books that suggest using 20 to 40 sheets of film for simple testing. That seems like a fairly ridiculous and exaggerated statement to me. (I'll go out on a limb and suggest you've never actually done this but are just offering up another strident opinion.) Granted, film costs a LOT more than it used to, so not using it up (which isn't wasting it...) on testing seems like a good idea. You can do a test for your personal film speed with your meter, your processing, etc. and use just one sheet of film, not 20 or 40.

And when you're done with that, you can find your development time with just one more sheet of film. So all done and you're down just two sheets of film. Those two sacrificed sheets will save you film in the long run by taking the surprise out of turning the lights on with film in the fixer.

How? Pick up some cheap, nearly worn out film holders. (They show up fairly regularly on Craigslist if you search "darkroom" and "dark room") If you get two of them, you'll have 4 dark slides. Drill a hole in the top half of one dark slide. Drill a hole in a second one, but move it along the top half so the exposure "spot" (circle) on the film will be in a different place. Do this twice more so you have 4 dark slides, with a progression of holes on the top half. That gives you 4 tests on the top half of one sheet of film. In your actual testing, you'll flip those 4 over after the first 4 exposures and you'll have a progression of 4 more holes on the bottom of the one sheet of film. You have to think about what you're doing when you test, and writing 1-8 on the holes (1-4 on one side, 5-8 on the other) helps with possible confusion. Develop that sheet and you'll have eight exposures from which to select for the film speed test. Which circle is which exposure is obvious, naturally, since the circles will start off nearly too light to see and get quite dark. You'll have plenty of unused space on that sheet for measuring your B+F, which you need to know.

For a development time test (now that you know your film speed) just expose one sheet normally at a subject that you'd like to place on Zone VIII. (A blank wall in the sun would be fine.) In the dark, cut it up into strips or squares or whatever shapes in whatever quantity you want to test, and give them progressively longer development times. You can use the 38 sheets you saved from testing for photography. (If you want to test for N+ or N- you can accomplish that with one more sheet each, obviously.)

Does a LF photographer have to do testing? No. You can get way into the ballpark by cutting box speed by 1/3rd or 1/2, then trying different development times until you are getting negatives you like. You'll quickly find your time in the darkroom. This is less precise, of course, and meters vary so the initial step of cutting the box speed is a guess/compromise to save time and bother, no question about it. So many great photos have been taken by people just relying on their experience.

PS: I also would NOT recommend Rodinal for this. HC110 would be fine. I've given up on Xtol based on my last failed batch, but if you've got some that works, that would be good for this too. Unless the film has been badly stored, you should have to trouble with it. Good luck.

[Doremus Scudder]

Shoot a sheet or two, develop normally and see if there is appreciable fog. If so, use a slower E.I. to get the shadow detail you want above the fog. Develop as you would normally (including plus or minus developments if you use the Zone System or whatever).

Best,

Doremus

[j.e.simmons]

Following up on Kevin's test procedure- I shoot my test sheets in my normal, numbered film holders. I arrange them in the darkroom so that I know which is which, then when removing the film I use a single hole punch and put 1-2-3-4 etc. Holes in the film to tell which is which.

[Naej]

I used long expired Tri-X 320 since the last year (or two. It was a big box, well stored. I'm about to finish it unfortunately). I don't know how long it is expired as I'm not at home at the moment.

But what I could say is I use Rodinal to develop it. The first time, I was scared due to the sudden change of color of the chemical when emptying the tank (going dark purple. I thought it was the whole emulsion). I was sure my films will be blank, but no. The results were always fine without any loss of details due to underexposure.

So, my opinion is. You will be good to go, even with Rodinal. But that will depend on how stored the film was.