Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Daniel, The December issue of Black and White Photography also has one of my pictures in it, on page 51. Bob > Philippe, > > Have you ever seen the magazine "Black and White Photography" from the UK? > > http://www.gmcpubs.com > > In the current, December 2005, issue there is an article about fine > grain developers. They run through the merits and disadvantages of > Microdol-X, Adox ADX, Calbe A49/Adox ATM49 (both are Agfa Atomal), > Tetenal Ultrafin Plus and Mac LP-Cube XS. > > Most of what has been said about Microdol-X has already been said here. > > I don't know where the idea comes from that Tri-X is grainy. The 400TX > is one of Kodak's most fine-grained films (TMX probably beats it out, > but I doubt if much else does). Don't give up on the obvious before > you dive into esoteric concoctions. Diluted D76 or Xtol will get you a > long way. My print for round 4 of the print exchange was Tri-X and D76 > 1:1. I don't think it is grainy. > > Best, > Daniel > > > On 1/3/06, Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> wrote: >> Thank you all for the input. >> >> But concluding after my initial question: >> 1) Better don't combine Tri-X with Microdol X because the developer >> counteracts on the speed and grain of the emulsion, thus on the >> character of the film. >> 2) But if you do, expose the Tri-X at ISO 200, dilute the Microdol 1 >> to 3, and search the web (f.i. on http://www.digitaltruth.com/ >> devchart.html) for correct development times since Kodak's times stink. >> >> >> >> >> >> Op 3-jan-06, om 17:11 heeft Jeffery Smith het volgende geschreven: >> >> > I've seen a few respectable pictures taken with Tri-X and Rodinal. >> > I've >> > never ventured into that combo, but I may try it using a bit of >> > overdevelopment like you suggest. It is next to impossible to get >> > Rodinal >> > down here for a decent price. I think I'll try Photographer's >> > Formulary >> > generic Rodinal. >> > >> > Jeffery Smith >> > New Orleans, LA >> > http://www.400tx.com >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org >> > [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of >> > Dan >> > States >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 8:16 AM >> > To: lug@leica-users.org >> > Subject: RE: [Leica] tri-x and microdol-x >> > >> > >> > Microdol x used at recommended times does reduce film speed, but >> > when shot >> > at 250 and developement is extended it produces proper negative >> > density. I >> > have found that much of what I used to call poor resolution was >> > actually >> > underdevelopement. Tri-x needs to be fully developed or the sharpness >> > impression is reduced. The problem with high accutance developers >> > like >> > FX-39 and Ilfosol s is the granularity increase is very >> > unattractive at >> > greater than 5x enlargement. (FX-39 is really not even recomended >> > for high >> > speed film.) >> > >> > Considering that maximum resolution on hand held photography is >> > rarely more >> > than 60lp Tri-x is capable of all the sharpness you could need. The >> > reduction of grain appearance is, in my opinion, more important to >> > final >> > image quality with that film. >> > >> > So far I have found Kodak's rec development times to be total >> > crap. Nearly >> > all thier films require 15-30% more developement time than their >> > website >> > states. >> > >> > In the end, you should try microdol, d76, xtol, DDX, rodinal and other >> > developers. They are not expensive, and you will be able to find >> > what works >> > >> > best for you...plus, it's fun! >> > >> > best wishes >> > Dan >> > >> >> From: "Jeffery Smith" <jsmith342@cox.net> >> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >> >> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> >> >> Subject: RE: [Leica] tri-x and microdol-x >> >> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 07:09:45 -0600 >> >> >> >> I found that the grain-dissolving action of Microdol-X left very >> >> little >> >> snap >> >> in the images. It even made Panatomic-X look bad. My advice would >> >> be....don't use. >> >> >> >> Jeffery Smith >> >> New Orleans, LA >> >> http://www.400tx.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org >> >> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of >> >> Philippe >> >> Orlent >> >> Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 3:40 PM >> >> To: LUG Group >> >> Subject: [Leica] tri-x and microdol-x >> >> >> >> >> >> Just bought both to see how they combine. >> >> But having never worked with either: are there things that I should >> >> know? Do's and don'ts? >> >> Push or pull? >> >> Dilute or not? >> >> ... >> >> I would be very grateful if the combined knowledge base of the LUG >> >> would help me on this one. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Leica Users Group. >> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Leica Users Group. >> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Leica Users Group. >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Leica Users Group. >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >