Favorite Dev for Tri-X in 120

[jvo]

...I usually just meter for the subject and point at my camera. Is this wrong?....

in a incident reading you want to be measuring the light hitting the subject, so you are pointing the meter towards the light source. if it's the same on you as the subject (for instance, the sun!), you can do it from your position. if its from a different light source, then you point your meter at the source from the subject position.

(p.s. the only combination is tri-x and rodinal, overexposed 1 stop! heh-heh!)

 

[Grim Tuesday]

in a incident reading you want to be measuring the light hitting the subject, so you are pointing the meter towards the light source. if it's the same on you as the subject (for instance, the sun!), you can do it from your position. if its from a different light source, then you point your meter at the source from the subject position.

(p.s. the only combination is tri-x and rodinal, overexposed 1 stop! heh-heh!)

Welp, for some reason I was completely under the impression it should be pointed at the camera. I will try out the correct technique and see how it changes things!

 

[MattKing]

in a incident reading you want to be measuring the light hitting the subject, so you are pointing the meter towards the light source. if it's the same on you as the subject (for instance, the sun!), you can do it from your position. if its from a different light source, then you point your meter at the source from the subject position.

Welp, for some reason I was completely under the impression it should be pointed at the camera. I will try out the correct technique and see how it changes things!

Actually ......
You probably are doing it right.
Most of the incident meters we use have a dome which has the effect of integrating light from various sources. Unless you are working with strong back or side lighting, standing where your subject is and pointing the meter at your camera does a nice job of integrating the direct and indirect light sources that illuminate the part of your subject that the camera sees.
If you use an incident meter with strong back or side lighting, it is a bit different. In those cases, you need to measure individually the different sources of light illuminating your subject - things like direct sun, open sky and reflected light from the ground - and you do that by pointing the meter at the light source (usually with an accessory for that purpose, such as a flat disc, rather than a dome), and then manually integrating the various readings, depending on what balance of lighting and effects you are trying to achieve.

 

[john_s]

If results are soft, maybe just develop a bit more (+20%). 35mm film and rollfilm are not necessarily exactly the same in terms of development (physical differences).

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sirius, I tray process LF and process 35 & 120 in small tanks. My standard time is 14 minutes. 20 min in a Jobo will cook it for sure. Actually the printed info from Photo Formulary is quite good and summarizes much that has been written about Pyrocat and goes into detail re output.... i.e. VC or graded paper etc. Most of my negatives print well on grade 2 or equivalent filtration.

Thank you, that is what I am looking for, I started at 9 minutes based on the data sheet and the negative were too thin. I will shoot some test rolls and start at 14' 20".

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's an interesting question. I don't think it is the lenses... The results I tend to like in 35mm are with my Nikon 50mm 1.4AI and Nikon FA so the metering should be solid. The results I don't like have been with Hasselblad and Autocord lenses, both which I think are plenty contrasty. I have a Sekonic incident meter, though maybe I'm not using it right. I usually just meter for the subject and point at my camera. Is this wrong?

Since you have invested in some quite notable equipment, why not have the light meters calibrated. I use George Milton at Quality Light Metric, 7095 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90028, (323) 467-2265.

 

[GregY]

Sirius, Here's a link to the tech sheets for Pyrocat HD. Note the information on regarding start times on the bottom of p1 & top of p2. Hope this helps http://stores.photoformulary.com/content/01-5091.pdf

 

[NB23]

You might be onto something: your MF camera is maybe over-exposing consistently by one stop versus your 35mm camera. This would explain a lot, and it is not an unheard of problem.

As a side note, usually my reflected and incident readings have a 1-stop difference in most cases, where reflected are underexposing. Ever since I switched to incident metering (despite my camera’s internal meters), my negatives look much better.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sirius, Here's a link to the tech sheets for Pyrocat HD. Note the information on regarding start times on the bottom of p1 & top of p2. Hope this helps http://stores.photoformulary.com/content/01-5091.pdf

I have that sheet and the earlier edition, but neither include Kodak Tri-X 400 120 nor Ilford Delta 3200 120 exposed ate ISO 3200 nor Rollei IR 400. Hence my search for development times.

 

[GregY]

Sirius, I've been using Pyrocat for many years and read all the various stuff along the way, especially anything by Sandy King. I gleaned a bunch of useful info from Ed Buffaloes writings. I pretty much took as a starting point any suggestions for ASA 400 film. In the P Formulary writings i especially took note of the various remarks on agitation. In the end i've been very happy with my results on Tri-X and particularly with my favourite FP4+ & the resulting 16x20" & 20x24" from medium format.

 

[John Galt]

Tri-X in Microdol X is pretty much my goto for 400 speed 120 . . .

 

[BradS]

Actually ......
You probably are doing it right.
Most of the incident meters we use have a dome which has the effect of integrating light from various sources. Unless you are working with strong back or side lighting, standing where your subject is and pointing the meter at your camera does a nice job of integrating the direct and indirect light sources that illuminate the part of your subject that the camera sees.
If you use an incident meter with strong back or side lighting, it is a bit different. In those cases, you need to measure individually the different sources of light illuminating your subject - things like direct sun, open sky and reflected light from the ground - and you do that by pointing the meter at the light source (usually with an accessory for that purpose, such as a flat disc, rather than a dome), and then manually integrating the various readings, depending on what balance of lighting and effects you are trying to achieve.

I agree. This how I was taught and what I have always done.

 

[destroya]

when i got back into film again, I started with tri-x and D76. I was not disappointed with the results, just looking to explore things. finally settled on Pyro-m for all my films. The stain helps minimize grain when wet printing and when scanning, I find pyro developers scan much better than non staining films. So I get the best of both worlds. HIgh contrast scene, meter at 200 develop for 16 min at 72 degrees, agitation every 2 min after a 1 min initial agitation. for box speed, I shoot at 320 and develop for 19 min, same agitation scheme. great results. I have a 20x24 shot from tri-x shot in a 6x9 fuji rangefinder and even at that size there is no grain in the image with the great tri-x tonality. I interchange tri-x and tmax 400 all the time even though tmax 400 is my go to walk around handheld film in 120

 

[destroya]

You might be onto something: your MF camera is maybe over-exposing consistently by one stop versus your 35mm camera. This would explain a lot, and it is not an unheard of problem.

As a side note, usually my reflected and incident readings have a 1-stop difference in most cases, where reflected are underexposing. Ever since I switched to incident metering (despite my camera’s internal meters), my negatives look much better.

I found the same thing. so when I use my reflected meters, I add anywhere from 1/2 to 1 extra stop and the results are much better. when I can, I use incident metering even when I have in camera metering available.

 

[GLS]

What is your development time for Tri-X 400 120 in Pyrocat HD in Glycol? I am still looking for the right time.

I have not used this combination much, as I tend to prefer the results from other 400 speed films, but looking at my archive here was one regime I tried:

Film rated at EI 200, developed in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100, 21 C, 14 mins, Sandy King's "minimal agitation" method.

The negs came out fine.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I found the same thing. so when I use my reflected meters, I add anywhere from 1/2 to 1 extra stop and the results are much better. when I can, I use incident metering even when I have in camera metering available.

How about getting the camera meters and the hand held meters calibrated?

 

[odell1618photography]

D76 1:1

 

[odell1618photography]

D76 1:1

 

[NB23]

How about getting the camera meters and the hand held meters calibrated?

They are.

As you know, a camera meter (reflected) will never be as accurate as an incident meter for all scenes. Understanding a scene and the light is the core of the issue.

Shooting scenes with dark walls/background will invariably be overexposed by a camera. Even Matrix metering isn’t as smart.

 

[KenS]

I was recently fortunate enough to win an auction for 50 rolls of 120 Tri-X, a film I honestly have struggled to get good results in with my standard dev, hc110. I've loved hc110 for 35mm Tri-X but for some reason I never like what I get from it in medium format. It seems soft, mushy and the contrast is not the same as I expect even when using the same times. Perhaps it's a result of matrix metering in 35mm vs incident in 120. Either way, I have a ton of this film now and am looking for recommendations for developers. Any suggestions?

Grim...
Pyrocat HD (in distilled H2O rather than glycol) is now the ONLY film developer now 'allowed' in
my darkroom.. but then I'm developing only 4x5 and sheet film in BTZS tubes using rotary development in a water-bath... I will never 'go back' to hangers in tank or tray development.
I suspect Pyrocat HD might 'solve all your problems' But then my 'metering' for 'white with texture' placed in Zone VIII may not meet your 'requirements'

Ken

in a water bath

 

[KenS]

I agree. This how I was taught and what I have always done.

I have often been 'challenged' about my spot metering for 'white with texture' placed on ZVIII for "Normal' development.. strangely enough ..it is usually pretty damned close to an incident meter reading (ie less than 1/3 of an f stop).

Ken