Can I develop TMax and Tri-X TOGETHER ??

<p>Okay, be gentle with me if this is a really stupid question, but I can't find an answer in the forum.<br>

I shot two rolls of 400 ISO B&W film, was about to spool them up together to put them in the same tank to develop with TMax developer. Then I realize that one roll is TMax, the other Tri-X. The prescribed time for each are really within about 45 seconds of each other so I was wondering what would happen if I did them together? I would do the median time.<br>

Some darkroom veteran out there must have the answer...<br>

Thanks!<br>

Liz<br>

{Oh, and I have only developed film in on my own about a dozen times, so speak slowly..}</p>

<p>If the development times are so close, just average them and you'll be fine.</p>

<p>Thanks, Robert, for such a quick response. I am itching to develop these.<br>

Cheers!</p>

<p>But fix longer as the tmax needs longer fixing than the tri-X.</p>

<p>If you use Diafine Developer, you can develop any film together with another film. But you have to use different ISO numbers when you shoot the films.</p>

<p>Diafine gives a speed loss with Tmax and a gain with Tri-X. So as to get Bruce clarified there.</p>

<p>I think Kodak's HC110 dilution B might be what you're looking for. I've noticed that many black & white films have the same dilution B times in HC110 at that dilution. You could use the Massive Developing Chart as a starting point, but an ideal situation would be to conduct your own test before developing anything important.<br>

BTW, if you only do film occasionally, HC110 is a great developer as the liquid concentrate has a long shelf life (longer than TMAX developer and unsurpassed in life by any other developer except Rodinal).</p>

<p>I've had some surprises developing T-grain films with K-grain films. I suspect it has to do with the iodide in the T-grain emulsions, the same thing that makes them so tough to fix, acting as a restrainer for the K-grain films. If your TX comes out looking thinner than expected, this might be an explanation. Good luck!</p>

<p>I noticed issues similar to what Jay described when I mixed T-Max films with other films in the same tank. No catastrophic failures, just some unexpected results. I might occasionally mix other types of films together for developing in Diafine, but I'd usually develop T-Max films only with T-Max films.</p>

<p>I'd also prepare separate batches of fixer: one for use only with T-Max films (which exhaust rapid fixer more quickly); one for all other films; one for print fixing.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the information. I processed the film last night together, and they appear pretty much normal. Well, at least the TMax seemed normal since I have scanned that more than anything. The Tri-X has a lot more contrast and grain, and some shots that depended on more subtle tones really suffered. I will have to admit that I am not much of a fan of the Tri-X, but have been influenced by other photographer's ravings. May be I am just a tabular grain kind of gal...<br /> I think in the future I won't mix the two. These weren't crucial rolls, but it will keep me forever wondering....Was it too much agitation? bad exposures? reaction of being with the TMax? Or just the nature of Tri-X?<br /> Tri-X shot on Flickr -- grainy, and hard to retain detail in the beard:<br /> <img src=" alt="" /><br /> TMax shot on Flickr -- much better tonality:<br /> <img src=" alt="" /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Oops, here are the photographs samples of each. Both were shot with a Rollei Rangefinder.<br>

Tri-X -- grainy, and hard to retain much detail in the beard:<br /> <a title="CAUTION by Lizard Martini, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5459795590_5c392c1e85.jpg" alt="" /><br /> </a><br>

TMax shot on Flickr -- much better tonality:<br>

<a title="Taking the Lift, Bellevue by Lizard Martini, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5459967312_960165eac8.jpg" alt="Taking the Lift, Bellevue" width="334" height="500" /></a></p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Or just the nature of Tri-X?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That. T-Max negatives are much better suited to scanning than most b&w films I've tried and usually scan as well as C-41 monochrome films like XP2 Super. Tri-X negatives print beautifully with conventional enlargement, but are trickier to scan without grain being exaggerated.</p>

<p>If you prefer to scan rather than use an enlarger, try giving your film a little less development than the manufacturer's times recommend. Or, try the times recommended for a condenser head enlarger, if the manufacturer provides data for both condenser and diffusion (dichroic or variable contrast) head enlargers.</p>

<p>Both of those photos look pretty good to me. Exposure and development look good. It's hard to tell much from small JPEGs. Resampling and compression tend to mask minor flaws.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you use Diafine Developer, you can develop any film together with another film.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And with Prescysol.</p>

<p>I am very glad that I asked my "stupid" question. I have learned so much.<br>

Lex - I have heard some about TMax being good for scanning, but finally I get it. I will try less time -- see if I can't find the times listed for a condenser head. At least for 35mm, I think I will stick to TMax 400. Since I have been shooting more 120 with my Rolleiflex, I find that I am greedy for more definition and information out of a single frame.<br>

Thanks all -- many ideas, and different developers, to try out. Cheers!</p>

<p>I am always looking for ways to develop the two films I use the most together, HP5+ and FP4+. The last time I did it the HP5+ was exposed at 800 and the FP4+ at 125. I checked my ilford manual and discovered that 8 minutes with microphen stock would work. Glad I did it, both came out very nice.</p>