Problem developing Tri-X in D76

[kent_tolley2]

I have a problem developing Tri-X 400 in D76. In the link: in the

middle-right above the black fence is tone bleeding through from the

black onto the light sky. I agitate by inversion in a Paterson tank

and the bleed is parallel to the flow of the developer over the

film. Is this from too gentle an agitation routine? Does Tri-X

want to be shaken like a martini shaker?<div></div>

[colmmccarthy]

Well, it's your agitation alright. I'll leave others to expand on this, but shaken like a martini? No.

[colin jackson]

As kodak says on their website:

 

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/

f4017.jhtml#small-tankprocessing(8-or16-ouncetank)

 

Small-Tank Processing (8- or 16-ounce tank)

 

With small single- or double-reel tanks, drop the loaded film reel into the developer and

attach the top to the tank. Firmly tap the tank on the top of the work surface to dislodge

any air bubbles. Provide initial agitation of 5 to 7 inversion cycles in 5 seconds; i.e.,

extend your arm and vigorously twist your wrist 180 degrees.

 

Check the URL for a little diagram.

 

That's fairly vigorous and since I started following their directions, my results improved. I

have an diffuser head on my enlarger and I found that the fairly brisk agitation they

described helped give a little crispness and density that I was otherwise missing.

 

When all else fails, follow directions written by those more knowledgeable than ourselves.

 

Good luck!

[kent_tolley2]

link broken. I can see from your instructions it wants 5-7 turns in 5 seconds for initial agitaion but you said nothing about the rest of the process. Actually that speed does sound about right for martini agitation.

[kent_tolley2]

got the link to work. there's a space in the middle and you need the entire line

[kent_tolley2]

<A HREF=" http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.jhtml#small-tankprocessing(8-or16-ouncetank)">Kodak Instructions</A>--

[kent_tolley2]

Thanks Colin. They say 5-7 turns in a 5 second period every 30 seconds of development. From their instructions I need to agitate faster.

[ronald_moravec1]

Initial agitation controls a lot of film marking and if you were to read the instructions that came with the tank, they say to do rotational agitation with the twist stick right after pouring the developer in. Two inversions every 30 sec is more than adequate for subsequent agitation as ther is lots of room for developer to flow into the lid/cap.

 

Small stainless tanks do not have the "head room" the Patterson has and the Kodak instructions work very well.

 

I also recommend giving a quarter turn to the tank every time you set it down to further randomize the agitation.

 

I can not see how the fence is making the marks, ah just did. The agitation is insufficient and the developer in the dark fence is less used and when you agitate, it streaks the sky. Two inversions, and give it time for the developer to flow into the top of the tank each time.

[richard_trochlil]

Uh..if you fill the tank all the way to the top, you can sometimes get this result. Be sure not to overfill.

 

Don't ask me why I know this.

[terry_m1]

I develop Tri-X, whether shot at ISO 400 or ISO 620, in Microdol-X diluted 1:3 at 75 degrees for 18 minutes on a stainless steel reel in a stainless steel tank with only 5 inversions each minute and get gorgeous results. Try this--you'll love it!

[colmmccarthy]

Good point above. Too much chemistry will cause problems too. I do 5 or 6 inversions (upside down to rightside up) in a 5 second period.

[paul_hoyt]

Kent,

 

In film development it is agitation, agitation, agitation. Most development problems are from lack of agitation and most of the posts agree that your negative suffers from under agitation. There are many superstitions about how to hold the tank and using a slight rotation, etc. I recommend using water to pre-soak the film before adding the developer. For me, it makes for more uniform development since the negative is already wet and the developer just displaces the water in the film. You should agitate the film for one full minute which includes the addition of the developer. Agitate by inversion, end over end. Then agitate every 30 seconds (until development is complete) by inverting your tank 4 times; you should see the bottom of your tank twice. Shake or "rap" the tank to dislodge any air bubble trapped in the film. The film must be covered by the developer, but you must have air above the film and the top of the tank. Air bubbles mix the developer during the inversions, no air no mixing. Swirling is unnecessary if you use the inversion technique. "Does Tri-X want to be shaken like a martini?", you want to mix your developer not make it foam.

 

Once you have an agitation technique for developing negatives that produces consistent densities, do not change your technique. Changes can effect contrast.

 

Paul

[kent_tolley2]

Thank you all. I'm going to start with the Kodak instructions because they precisely describe the speed, duration, and frequency of the agitation. Then I'll deviate if necessary to get different results.

[kent_tolley2]

I'm going to presoak the film in water too. It makes sense that it would then flow onto the film more smoothly if the film was already saturated and the emulsion expanded.

[ronald_moravec1]

Kodaks instructions apply to small stainless tanks. Patterson does not fit that catagory.

 

5/7 inversions will give you a frothy mess. Please read again what I wrote above. Or read Pattersons instructions which I follow and repeated above.

[kent_tolley2]

5 guys all with radically different answers, some actually contradicting others. Sorry but not very clear guys. I figure, like most of you, I need more agitation.

[lex_jenkins]

Kent, if you search the archives for previous threads on agitation you'll find it's always been a hot button issue. Over time we all develop our favorite method(s) and tend to be rather dogmatic about them.

 

I favor inversion for stainless tank/reel systems; twisty paddle agitation for plastic tank/reel systems; and I'll occasionally do stand processing with little or no agitation with stainless tanks/reels.

 

Plastic tank/reel systems are designed to accomodate twist agitation. There's a nubble at the bottom of the tank that mates with the bottom of the reel spindle. When the twist paddle is used the spindle and reels are cammed up and down, adding vertical agitation to the rotation.

 

There are a few problems associated with using inversion agitation on plastic tanks/reels:

 

1. The design of the reels produces more turbulence and foaming.

 

2. Some developers are very prone to foaming when agitated. Try adding a dab of borax or baking soda to ID-11, use inversion agitation in a plastic tank/reel system and see what happens. Some homebrewed developers using borax, soda and lye have a very soapy feel like a surfactant and will foam pretty badly with vigorous agitation.

 

3. Rapping the tank to dislodge bubbles, as we do with stainless tanks, can crack plastic tanks.

 

4. Inverting plastic tanks/reels can cause chemistry to become trapped in the complex light baffle/liquid funnel lids. This is especially true of the Spanish made plastic tanks/reels used by many students and others on tight budgets. The tanks are good quality, but they're not well suited to inversion agitation. And they leak badly when inverted.

 

The danger to losing chemistry - whether it's trapped in the lid/funnel, or through leakage - is that the upper edge of the film can be left high and dry and will be developed and fixed unevenly.

 

Stainless tanks/reels are less likely to produce foaming because of the design of the reels. The wire is rounded with more spacing throughout the spiral. This produces less turbulence and less risk of foaming. Also, less chemistry is trapped in the lid. And while even stainless tanks can leak, it's usually not enough to cause problems.

 

In most cases there's no single correct way to agitate. Among the few exceptions is Diafine, which requires very careful agitation. Otherwise, consistency is the most important factor in getting repeatable results. Never agitate faster than once per second. Count "one-thousand-and-one" as you gently invert the tank. Some development standards suggest five inversions to start with three to five inversions at 30 second or 1 minute intervals. Stick with the same timing - not too vigorous and no faster than one inversion per second. Even when continuous agitation is listed as an option for some developers and techniques, the definition of continuous is one agitation every three to five seconds - no shaking like a martini.

 

Take notes so that you can determine later which methods appear to deliver the results you want and which seem to be causing problems.

[kent_tolley2]

Thanks Lex. Any thoughts on the bleeding from the dark fence on the right into the light sky in the enclosed picture?

[lex_jenkins]

Sure, that's due to surging from uneven, possibly too-vigorous agitation. The effects of surging and uneven agitation are most noticeable when there are areas of fairly high contrast, such as the fence silhouetted against a nearly white sky. Notice you don't see the same problem, or as severe a problem, in areas of similar density, such as where the buildings meet the sky. And this effect usually seems to show up near the film edges where surging would be most turbulent, right next to the reel flanges.

 

As I mentioned in my earlier comments, I believe it's too difficult to consistently control agitation in plastic tank/reel systems using the inversion method, because of the turbulence produced by the design of the plastic reels.

 

Still, if you prefer inversion agitation with the Paterson system just keep it gentle and consistent. Be sure there's enough chemistry in the tank to ensure the film is completely immersed when the tank is set down.

[kent_tolley2]

Thanks Lex. At last a definitive answer and too vigorous agitation makes sense. I'm going to use the stir rod doing Tri-X in the future. I get good results with inversion, plastic tank, and TMX but I agitate like it was nitro-glycerine with no sudden moves. I thought Tri-X would need and could tolerate rougher treatment. The bleed on my negative is almost like a burn from the chemical moving too rapidly over the emulsion. Thanks again for your advise. I figure if anyone would know about this particular question it would be you.

[sheldon_strauss2]

the areas in with the streaking is underdevelopement due to gentle agitation the dark area in the print are light areas on the negative too much agitation can cause air bubbles resulting in underdevelopement as spots I find it strange that streaks follow the fence how did scan the image and you look at he negative to see if the streaks are there scanners cause can cause this effect if the scanning element has dust on it. Also D76 1:1 is better with Tri X because of the slightly longer developement times

 

Sheldon