Which 400 speed film for an E.I of 800 -1200?

[jeff_schroeder]

I am doing some testing of my own right now but I would appreciate input from others. I want to choose a 400 speed film which I can rate anywhere from 200 to 1200. At 200 to 400 I will use PMK (I like the results I get from both Tri-X and HP5+ in PMK) but for the faster E.I. I will develop using either Xtol or Microphen. Can anyone give me their ideas and/or experiences. Right now I seem to have narrowed my choice to HP5+ or TMY400. Which one of these two pushes better? Thanks for your help.

[jim_megargee]

IMHO - I would go with HP5+ or Tri-X not TMY400. I might also consider

a developer other than the two you are thinking of using. Such as HC-

110. But as with all things related to this -testing is the only way to

go. But I would test out the different combinations with an eye towards

the final size of prints you intend to be making in the future. Often a

film /developer combo that works well (fine grain,etc.) at 8X10 print

size does not hold up well at 16/20 or 20/24. This is not an uncommon

result of "pushing "film in "fine grain" developers.

[wolfram_j._f._kollig]

As I do use PMK, I would rather like to comment on using

Tri-X/HP5+/TMY at 400 to 1600.

 

<p>

 

To me seems like the old emulsions TriX/HP5+ are better for pushing. I

fairly often pushed Tri-X to 1600. (Even 3200 can be done)Using DD-X,

which is similar to Microphen. I use Tri-X at 400 to 1600 for

portraits or when ever I feel the need for a nice grain structure.(New

emulsions look almost grainless at 8*10'')

 

<p>

 

What I did not like was TMY pushed 2 stops in Xtol simply grainy, too

grainy for my taste (marriage picture in the church).For 400 and fine

detail I use Delta 400 in Xtol 1:1.

 

<p>

 

I was not really happy with my results for HP5+ in Xtol. So maybe I

should have tried Microphen.

 

<p>

 

Kind regards,

 

<p>

 

Wolfram

[h._david_huffman1]

Jeff, In past years I have a great deal of success using Tri-x and Accufine developer. Accufine is manufactured somewhere in Chicago and ads can be found in Shutterbug as well as many other magazines.

Probably on-line as well. The Accufine pushes at least one stop and can be used for more of a push. There is, also, a two-bath developer, made by the same company, called "DiaFine" which is supposed to work very well and gives low grain.

Hope this helps

David

[john_stockdale]

I agree that Tri-X and Acufine is a good combination. I used it for years taking shots in an old ice rink where I had to use a fairly fast shutter speed. These old negatives are as good as or better than any I have taken with other films I've tried in similar light situations, including TMax 400 and TMax developer. The grain is robust but sharp, and detail is very good. However, I did try Diafine once, and I found the look to be quite unacceptable. It had a soft mushy appearance, although the shadow density was ok.