Tri-X @ 1600 and D23 ??

Hello,

has anyone ever tried developing Tri-X (new version) pushed to 1600 in
D23? I can't seem to find the developing times anywhere.

Regards
Magdalena

Magdalena W. wrote:
Hello,

has anyone ever tried developing Tri-X (new version) pushed to 1600 in
D23? I can't seem to find the developing times anywhere.

Maybe with good reason. D23 is a soft working developer needing
about 1/2 stop more exposure than D76. It is not the thing I'd use
to push a fast film for two stops. Maybe it can be done, but I wouldn't
try it. Use something with phenidone in it like Xtol or Microphen.

Martin

"Baz" wrote in message
...
Martin Jangowski wrote:

Maybe with good reason. D23 is a soft working developer needing
about 1/2 stop more exposure than D76. It is not the thing I'd use
to push a fast film for two stops. Maybe it can be done, but I wouldn't
try it. Use something with phenidone in it like Xtol or Microphen.

Please tell us why one shouldn't use a brew only because you wouldn't.
D23 is strong enough to carry out a job even in push conditions. It
minimizes grain, can push up shads without blocking highs anyway, better
than D76. Nevertheless, one must test _before_ with a scratch roll
shooted in conditions as close as possible to the final situation, a
common [I underline] way to see if a brew meets his own requirements.
And if any stuff posted here has a snap point with truth.

You can overdevelop Tri-X in any developer and get the midtone speed up to
1600. However, the shadow speed will still be appreciably lower with D-23
than with something like Xtol. Different developers do give slightly
different true speed.

"Magdalena W." wrote in message ...
Hello,

has anyone ever tried developing Tri-X (new version) pushed to 1600 in
D23? I can't seem to find the developing times anywhere.

Regards
Magdalena

The speed of Tri-X in D23 is about 250. If you need 1600, try T-Max 3200.

Magdalena W. wrote:

Hello,

has anyone ever tried developing Tri-X (new version) pushed to 1600 in
D23? I can't seem to find the developing times anywhere.

In a world that includes Diafine, why would you go to this kind of
trouble to get 400TX to EI 1600? Three minutes in Bath A, three minutes
in Bath B, water stop, and fix. You're hanging the film before D-23
would be through developing it for a two-stop push, and you get better
shadow detail, about a full stop of toe speed increase (so your contrast
looks like a one-stop push, not two stops). Of course, if you're trying
for grain that looks like driveway gravel, you want a low-solvent
developer; try HC-110 Dilution G (1:119 from USA syrup), stand developed
for 90 minutes.

--
I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.

Baz wrote:
Martin Jangowski wrote:

Maybe with good reason. D23 is a soft working developer needing
about 1/2 stop more exposure than D76. It is not the thing I'd use
to push a fast film for two stops. Maybe it can be done, but I wouldn't
try it. Use something with phenidone in it like Xtol or Microphen.

Please tell us why one shouldn't use a brew only because you wouldn't.

Because pushing is a bad idea anyway, and pushing with the wrong tools
is a worse idea. A T-Max 3200 or a Delta 3200 has enough speed without
going to extremes.

D23 is strong enough to carry out a job even in push conditions. It
minimizes grain, can push up shads without blocking highs anyway, better
than D76. Nevertheless, one must test _before_ with a scratch roll
shooted in conditions as close as possible to the final situation, a
common [I underline] way to see if a brew meets his own requirements.
And if any stuff posted here has a snap point with truth.

Well, I made tests like this (with real live objects and sensitometric
measurements)... and found that the advantage of D23 is that it's easy
to mix and not much more. It has about the same characteristics as D76,
just a little slower. I'm sure you can use it to go to astronomical
speeds with any film (why not use PanF@128000...), but there are
just better tools for this.

Martin

Uzytkownik "Donald Qualls" napisal w
wiadomosci

In a world that includes Diafine, why would you go to this kind of
trouble to get 400TX to EI 1600?
Because in my world (Poland, new member of the EU ) we have heard of
Diafine, but not laid our hands on it
And yes, I realize there are films such as Tmax 3200 (personally I
hate Delta), but sometimes you're in a situation where you need and
want to take photos in poor light conditions - and the only thing you
have in your Domke is a few rolls of TX (because that's the stuff I
always carry).
D23 is better (IMHO) than ID 11 for developing TX. So that's why I
asked about specifically that combination.

Thanks anyway
Magdalena

U¿ytkownik "Baz" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci


try cook it this way: twenty celsius degrees for about fourteen
minutes
std agitation, if you're on a difflight source. but maybe that
eighteen-twenty same temp 1+1 D23/water will raise up shads a bit
without loose highs.
Thanks, I'll follow your advice. Fortunately I do have a coldlight
enlarger, so it should work well.

I think D23 is right to cutoff some grain from tx.
TX defintely looks better in D23 than in Id 11/D76.
And the less grainy look is what I want.
Actually, for me, TX + D23 seems to be the "golden standard"

Thanks for your advice

Regards,
Magdalena

"Magdalena W." wrote in message
...
Hello,

has anyone ever tried developing Tri-X (new version)
pushed to 1600 in
D23? I can't seem to find the developing times anywhere.

Regards
Magdalena

Pushing any film 2 stops is going to be marginal no
matter what developer is used. The ISO speed of a film is
about its maximum for good shadow detail. What happens when
film is pushed is that the overall contrast is raised. Of
course the toe, or shadow part of the curve, is also
increased in contrast. This gives the effect of higher speed
for the shadows but results in excessive contrast for parts
of the film receiving anything like normal exposure. Tri-X
roll and 35mm film, i.e., the ISO-400 stuff, pushes
reasonably well but you would do better with a faster film
like T-Max P3200 or Ilford's equivalent. These are films
with ISO speeds of around 800 to 1000 but which deliver good
quality when pushed.
There is some variation in the speed delivered by various
developers. D-76/ID-11 is the benchmark. Some Phenidone
containing developers will deliver about 3/4 stop greater
speed (depending on the film) for a given contrast index.
Among such developers are Kodak T-Max and T-Max RS, Kodak
Xtol, Ilford Microphen. Some developers lose a little speed,
Rodinal is an example. D-23 and D-76 have very similar
properties other than D-76 has greater capacity. ]
Generally pushing film will increase the grain. There is
not much that can be done here. Probably Xtol is the finest
grain of the above, T-Max the best for greatest speed, but
coarser grain. The tonal rendition will be distorted
regardless of the developer because that comes from the
increased overall contrast of pushing.
Some mistatements are often made about some developers.
The sulfite in D-76 and D-23 acts as a solvent for the
silver halide in the emulsion. In these two developers the
solvent effect is such that it _increases_ film speed
slightly because it makes more development centers in the
halide crystals available to the developer. In developers
like Microdol-X or D-25, used full strength, which are very
inactive, the solvent has time to destroy some of the latent
image, lowering the film speed. This does not happen in D-23
or D-76 or other similar developers.
The ISO speed of black & white negative films for still
cameras is measured in a way that results in the lowest
exposure consistent with adequate shadow detail. It assumes
an average contrast that is too high for many users. When
the contrast is lowered (or raised) the ISO speed is no
longer valid. Most films have only about one stop latitude
for underexposure but a great many stops (as many as 12 for
some films) for overexposure. Latitude is the amount of
error in exposure than can be made and still have negatives
with good tonal rendition. This is why its better to use a
faster film than to push a slower one. At some point the
film just runs out of sensitivity and there will be no image
regardless of the kind of developer or the amount of
development, you will just increase the fog level.
For your application I would suggest T-Max P3200 and
Xtol.
Now, for pushing, the rule of thumb is to increase
development time about 1.5 times for about a one stop
increase in effective shadow speed. This will also increase
overall contrast about one paper grade. For two stops
increase time to about double normal, maybe a bit more. This
will increse contrast about 2.5 paper grades. The time
variation changes with film and developer. Tabular grain
films like T-Max, Delta, and Fuji Acros, change contrast
faster with time than do conventional films.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Magdalena W. wrote:

Uzytkownik "Donald Qualls" napisal w
wiadomosci

In a world that includes Diafine, why would you go to this kind of
trouble to get 400TX to EI 1600?

Because in my world (Poland, new member of the EU ) we have heard of
Diafine, but not laid our hands on it
And yes, I realize there are films such as Tmax 3200 (personally I
hate Delta), but sometimes you're in a situation where you need and
want to take photos in poor light conditions - and the only thing you
have in your Domke is a few rolls of TX (because that's the stuff I
always carry).
D23 is better (IMHO) than ID 11 for developing TX. So that's why I
asked about specifically that combination.

If you can't get Diafine, try using HC-110 Dilution G, stand developed
(continuous agitation first minute, then *no* agitation for the
remainder of the development time) for anywhere from 45 to 90 minutes.
With Tri-X, 90 minutes should give EI 1600, with strong compensation to
avoid blocked highlights, and with toe speed increased to 640 or 800.

Be sure you allow at least 3 ml of USA syrup, or 10 ml of European
concentrate, for each 135-36 or 120 roll; use a larger tank with empty
reels as spacers if necessary.

--
I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.