tri-x in id-11

i used the hp5+ and id11 for a long time now and am pretty happy with it. pushing up to 1600 is no problem.

<p>

does anyone know the developing time of the kodak tri-x in ID-11 at 800 and 1600 iso? the chart that comes with the developer doesn't show puch times for other than ilford films

Ilford ID-11 is an equivalent of Kodak D-76. I would suggest you to

go to <a href="http://www.digitaltruth.com/">The Massive film dev

chart</a> and pick-up the times stated for D-76.

<p>

If you want more information, I would suggest you to post your

request to the other excellent LUSENET Newsgroup <a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=B%26W%20Photo%

20%2d%20Film%20%26%20Processing">B&W Photo - Film & Processing </a>

Whoa! ID-11 and D-76 are similar, but the processing times are not

identical! A better idea is to get the recommendation for ID-11,

rather than D-76!

Looks to me like Ilford's recommended times for their own films run

about 15 to 20% greater for ID-11 than for the same films in D-76.

This holds true for FP-5, probably the most similar of their films to

Tri-X. So I think I'd consider going a bit to the plus side, even

though the Massive development chart indicates no difference between

the two developers. Ilford ought to know.

ID-11 is close to D-76 but it's not D-76 (packaged in 2 parts instead

of one, ...). It might explain the discrepencies (did I spelt that

right?). Also, I think I remember that Ilford and Kodak don't

calculate the characteristic curves of films in the same way. Do the

development times aim at the same density? There are probably

several other possible explanations, but anyway a 10 to 20%

difference is not very significant. I routinely shorten development

by 20% if I shot scenes with high contrast.

Tri-X @800, ID-11 (straight), 70 degrees F., 12 minutes, a little

agitation every 30 secs. This puts you in the ball park. But if it's

a sunny day the contrast is a bit strong if printed normally.