120 Tri-x @ 1600 in HC-110

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

Ornello
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: 120 Tri-x @ 1600 in HC-110

Post by Ornello » Sat May 12, 2018 9:32 pm

Jim Appleyard wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 8:46 am
Yup, NOTHING can be done! Try-X, Diafine, EI 1000
Not sure what this is supposed to prove, if anything.


pirateoversixty
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Peoria, Illinois

Re: 120 Tri-x @ 1600 in HC-110

Post by pirateoversixty » Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:12 pm

Jim:
Excellent result with Diafine. Much better than I was ever able to get with the stuff. Had good results with Acufine, though. All I can think of is that Orny must not have been using a developer suitable to push with, or something else with his technique. Again, very nice pic with the Diafine.
Jim M.

Jim Appleyard
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: 120 Tri-x @ 1600 in HC-110

Post by Jim Appleyard » Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:54 pm

Thanks. Diafine is pretty easy, but I don't get quite the 1600 EI with TX that they recommend, more like 1000. I've never been able to get the lifespan out of mine that some folks do. It was recommended on APUG that I use a pre-soak for all divided devs. I have started to use that and so far, so good. TX in Diafine has a bit of an "old look" to it, more like TX of the '70's and it woks quite well for wedding b/w.

Aoresteen
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:26 pm

Re: 120 Tri-x @ 1600 in HC-110

Post by Aoresteen » Sun Nov 11, 2018 1:13 am

I tend to agree with Ornello. Film has only one speed with a given developer. To say I exposed a given film at an EI of 1000 really doesn't tell us much. What light meter was used? To what standard is the meter calibrated? Was it reflected light or incident light that was measured? How reflective was the subject that was metered? And what developer was used? And what is your "normal" paper that you print on?

When Kodak or Ilford rates a film, they use an ISO standard in a lab environment and push their EI point as far down the H&D curve as they can (yields the highest ISO value) all measured with a calibrated densitometer. I never take photos in a lab and I don't follow the ISO standard, and I don't have a densitometer (yet!). So what they say the film speed is I find worthless for practical applications outside a lab. And I expect a full tonal rage of 11 zones which means I need to stay on the straight line portion of the H&D curve.

Back in the early 80's I ran tests to see how far I could push Tri-X. I exposed 5 rolls of Tri-X. Each roll had frames exposed at 100,200,400, 800, 1600, and 3200 EIs measured with a Sekonic Studio light meter. I used HC-110B & Dektol 1:1 developers and the developing time that was the recommended time for HC-11b at 400 then 2x, then 3x, and lastly 4x the recommended time. The last roll I developed in Dektol 1:1 for 15 minutes. I then made proper proofs of the negatives (minimum time for a maximum black through the clear area of the negative) on my normal grade 2 Ilford paper. The contact prints told the same story - the best frames were at EI 200 and the extended developing times just increased fog and reduced the tonal range. I concluded that you really can't push film speed - all you can do is underexpose and try to fix it with higher contrast paper. Sometimes it's the only option - like back in the day when I shot HS football games at night using B&W film ASA400 DIN27 :) .

Today I calibrate my EI empirically by running a simple test. I make a series of exposures that start at 2 stops overexposed from the mfg recommended EI to two stops under using daylight and again using artificial light. With an ISO 400 film that would be 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600. I then develop it for the mfg's recommended time in HC-110B. Then I make a proper proof on #2 paper and it's easy to see the best frame. It literally jumps out at you. Last year I bought some 35mm Ilford Delta 3200 and the tests showed that in my cameras with my meters I should expose the Delta 3200 at EI 800 in daylight and at EI 400 under artificial light. So I do and the negatives are easy to work with. My normal EI for HP5+ is 200 so I only gained a stop with the "3200" speed film with artificial light. That stop has proved useful so I have been keeping Delta 3200 in stock in 35mm and just ordered some 120 rolls. And I will test the 120 just like I tested the 35mm film.

Post Reply