Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50

Thread: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

  1. #21
    Huub
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    157

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    What comes out of the prewash is the anti-halation layer and is nothing to worry about.

    I think with 10 ml of Rodinal and 4 sheets you are pretty much in the ball park and should be ok, just like your fixer should work pretty fine as it is. How strong have you diluted your fix and how long did you fix? And how many films ran you through the diluted fix? Try to fix the film a second time in freshly diluted fixer. This can be done in a tray in daylight and see if it clears. This is what i meant with 'refixing the film'.

    Then there is still the question about the film marks - do you see the TXP320 mark somewhere along the top or bottom edge of the film? It is an indication of what might have caused the problem.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    north of the 49th
    Posts
    1,135

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    I use this same process (Rodinal and TF-5) with no issues at all. As well, when I dump the spent developer from the Jobo tank, the liquid is a dark blue so I'm not sure that should be taken as any indication of developer activity. Oddly enough, Rodinal comes out clear when I develop Acros.
    notch codes ? I only use one film...

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    567

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Kodak HC110 is an excellent developer and very economical at Dilution B (1:31) that I find no need to dilute it further except for a contraction while keeping the development time constant. I posted the following last week in answer to another film development question and have rewritten it bit to correct some errors make it clearer.

    Years ago I learned the method to find the correct developing time and EI for any film. I think the source was William Mortensen. Mortensen wrote some excellent books and articles about basic sensitometry. The last time I did this test was when I abandoned Tri-X and switched to HP5+ due to cost about five years ago. I proceed as follows.

    I set up my trays with my favorite developer HC110B (1:31). I pull out a sheet from the package in the dark. and then when the package is sealed again I turn on the room lights. This part of the test is done under the lights. I cut the sheet into five strips and mark them 1-5 by punching holes with a paper punch. Lets say the recommended time is 5:00. I want to see 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00 and 7:00, so I throw all the strips into the developer and agitate as usual until 3:00 when I move the No.1 strip over to the stop bath. Then I pull No.2 at 4:00, No.3 at 5:00, etc. I fix, wash and dry the strips as usual. What we are looking for is the best usable film DMax value. Obviously the film has been fully exposed! When strips dry lay down a page of news print on a table in good light. Find the strip through which the news print is barely visible. That's your developing time. Now to find the film speed.

    Go outside in unchanging light conditions and expose five sheets and expose one at the manufacturers rating and then the other four at one half a stop and one stop less and one half a stop and one stop more. In the dark, develop them all together for your newly derived time. Contact print them together exposing and developing the paper for maximum usable paper DMax value. Pick out the best-looking contact print and you have your film speed.

    Because my 7:00 negative looked the best on the first test, I did the test again with 7:00 as the central developing time and found that 8:00 was indeed too dense. This HP5+ time was the same as the as the developing time I had been using for Tri-X and film speed was also the same, EI400.

    Many of the last generation of B&W gurus favored a development time of 5:00 for Tri-X and suggested an EI of 64-100. You can do the above test backwards, developing for 5:00 minutes and finding the film speed. I like 100. The difference between negatives exposed at 100 and developed for 5:00 and those rated at 400 and developed for 7:00 is quite subtle. Both could be considered "normal" or N negatives. The 100 negative has slightly greater shadow and highlight detail that only a careful, knowledgeable printer and viewer could detect. This slight improvement might not be worthwhile trading for two stops in the field.

    From here, if you are still with me, you can derive expansion and contraction schemes for both the 100 and 400 "normal negs". I do this by changing dilution rather than time. Make sure you have at least 1 oz. of the concentrated sauce for each 8X10 sheet or equivalent. For contractions I found that 3/4 oz. concentrate to 31 1/4 ozs. H20 yields an N-1 neg at a one stop loss in film speed and 1/2 oz. concentrate to 31 1/2 ozs. H20 yields an N-2 neg at a two stop loss in film speed. For expansions, 1 1/4 oz. of concentrate to 30 3/4 ozs. H20 yields an N+1 neg at a one stop gain in speed and 1 1/2 ozs. concentrate to 30 1/2 ozs. H20 produces an N+2 negative with a two stop gain in speed.

    If you look at the chart of Tri-X film speed in Phil Davis' BTZS book you can easily pick out the film speed in HC110B 5:00 as EI 64.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    645

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    You might consider a "clip test". Take all or part of a sheet of film into room light, immerse it in developer, and see what happens. If the developer solution really is developer, the film will (eventually) turn black. If it turns clear, you have put it into fixer, and if anything else happens, the liquid is something other than developer or fixer. For an unknown film and/or developer, the time to turn black is a good starting point for real image development.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Quote Originally Posted by Huub View Post
    Try to fix the film a second time in freshly diluted fixer. This can be done in a tray in daylight and see if it clears. This is what i meant with 'refixing the film'.
    I will definitely try that. I am away from home for a couple days so I can't try until tomorrow evening--and I will check for the TXP320 market then, but I truly doubt it's there.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neal Chaves View Post
    ...the method to find the correct developing time and EI for any film....
    Wow, Neal! That's so logical! Very useful stuff, thanks!

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harold_4074 View Post
    You might consider a "clip test".
    As I make my way through all this great advice, I might have to try this. Very useful, deductive advice. Thanks, Harold!

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R View Post
    TF-5 agrees with TXP and all other general purpose films. You can rule that out.
    Thanks, Michael! I really love TF-5!! Glad to hear I don't have to change brands. I think I will mix up a fresh batch, though, after I get through with all these tests.

    Four minutes in TF-5 is all I do, and per instructions you don't need hypo clearing agent, which saves a step. I wonder if the standard dilution and/or time even with fresh TF-5 is not enough to do the job with TXP?

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    382

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    2-3 times the clearing time for any film is a good rule of thumb, and 4 minutes with intermittent agitation in a fresh, film strength solution of a rapid fixer such as TF-5 should be enough for TXP. If you wish you can go a few minutes longer in TF-5.

    All that said, your photo in the original post points to a development or exposure problem. I can't tell from the picture if there is any base fog, but either way fixation is not the problem. Something else is going wrong.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17

    Re: What is ruining my Tri-X 320?

    Just a quick update: The negatives do not have the "Kodak 320TXP" mark, or anything else--uniformly clear. Also, something changed since November, because I have a couple good results from then. As the investigation continues, the idea that the developer is at fault is most plausible at this point.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •