Tri-X / D76 development trouble

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>Hi guys,<br /> i work on a test with different films and developers to get the combination working best for me. Now i got a result which confuses me a lot and would appreciate you post your ideas what went wrong here. It is one of the classic combinations: Tri-X 400 with D76. I started with 6:45min, 20C, start agitation 5 times in 5 sec, then 5 times every 30 sec.<br /> What went wrong here? Any ideas?<br /> Peter</p><div></div>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>PS: D76 at full strength</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>Depleted fixer, high mineral content water, scanning problem? That looks like false colour or really odd staining along the top and bottom edges, or maybe it's partially unfixed film in the middle.</p>

<p>Is this on the whole roll? Is this a scan of the neg or a print?</p>

<p> </p>

[brucecahn]

<p>I just did a roll for 6:30 in D76 and got beautiful results. You are overagitating. Despite Kodak's recommendation, you should just invert it once every 30 seconds, otherwise it gets overdeveloped at the edges. That is not the reason for your problem though. It could have been exhausted fixer.The negative might also have been underdeveloped. Was it a thick or thin neg? If very thin the D76 may have been too old or contaminated.<br>

Suggest you try again and make sure all chemicals are fresh.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>That looks to me like insufficient fixing. Mix up some fresh fixer and refix at 20 C with constant agitation for a couple of minutes.</p>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>Thank you all for the first ideas! Some more information you asked for: its not on the whole role. I shot a whole film with the same motive and now I develop the film piece by piece with different developers. The problem didnt appear with HC-110, Microdol and Rodinal.<br /> This picture is a scan of the negative, not a print.<br /> I ask myself why this problem appeared only in the middle of the picture but not at the top and the bottom. If it was exhausted fixer, it must have been appeared on the entire picture, not only in the middle. Am I wrong? The developer has been fresh, the fixer wasn't but I fixed some other negs with it afterwards and they were fine.<br /> @Bruce: Am I really overagitating? I thought 5 times every 30 seconds are fine. But if the results become better with agitation only once every 30 secs I will try it of course :-)<br>

@Bob: I used distilled water for the development, scanner is no problem.</p>

<p> </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>If that's an accurate representation of the negative, yup, it looks like inadequate fixing. And while agitation isn't quite as critical to fixing as to development, it is important to ensure consistency. Let us know if refixing in a fresh batch takes care of the problem. If not, we'll tackle the next possibility.</p>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>ok i will try to fix the neg again for a couple of mins with fresh fixer and let you know the result tomorrow. thank you so far!</p>

[Julio Fernandez]

<p>This looks like insufficient fixing as Lex said above. Look for a milky stripe in the midst of the negative for confirmation.<br>

<br /> BTW, overagitation won't produce this effect. In fact, you could develop with continuous agitation if you want, reducing development time. Underagitation is much more likely to give you trouble than "overagitation", whatever that may be.</p>

<p>Tri-X with D-76 is one of the most forgiving combinations I have ever used. You should do fine by following instructions from Great Yellow Father.</p>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>Hi guys,<br>

as promised, the result of refixing the negative! You made my day, it works :-) Thank you a lot for the approach! But i still wonder: does the fixer soak in the edges? I thought it is effective on the surface of the neg! Can anybody explain that to me please?<br>

Another question: Does anybody of you experts have experience with D76 in comparison with HC-110? I made my first negs now with both developers D76 and HC-110. I personally prefer the operation method with concentrate and HC-110 delivers good results but I am still a bit uncertain because many of you work with D76. Is it just personal liking that many of you choose D76 or is there anything I missed that D76 is so popular?</p><div></div>

[photo_smith]

<p>Hi Peter<br>

Is it possible that the film was bowed in the middle while loaded in the spiral so it almost touched? If so you may have had less liquid over the centre thus exhausting the fix in the centre faster or if the fix was not fresh that might make it more noticeable. <br>

just a thought on why its in the centre as I have seen this in 120 films that almost touch.</p>

[fourthst]

<p>Peter, it is indeed personal preference. If you prefer working with HC-110 and like the results then that is the developer for you. Agitating 5 sec. every 30 sec. is fine (actually recommended for shorter dev times). One way to reduce agitation issues is to first fill the tank with just enough developer to just cover the film, that goes for stop and fix as well. To determine how much chemical you need, put an empty reel in an empty tank then pour in just enough water to cover the reel by about 1/4 inch (If you are using a 2 reel tank, put in 2 reels etc). There should be a fair amount of space left in the tank between the water and the top of the tank. Pour that water into a measuring cup and that is the amount of chemical you need to use when developing. Now, when you invert the tank the air pocket will provide adequate movement of chemical to avoid areas of uneven agitation.</p>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>Hi Mark,<br>

I already considered this as a reason for the curious appearance. When refixing the neg i pushed the neg a bit deeper into the reel. I will handle it this way also for the future to ensure the circumstances you explained will not occur. Thank you for this advice :-)<br>

Paul, that was the way i developed my short pieces of film already. Now another question relating to his: I developed a short piece of film (about 5 pictures) with 250ml developer. I have good results but now I want to make sure that when putting an entire film into the reel I get comparable results. Kodak writes that in case you use a small development tank for 1 film or the next size for 2 films, you have to extend the developing time for about 10% because of exhausting developer. The picture shown above is the result of a 5-picture-neg and 6:45 min developing time. If I want to develop an entire film with this result, do I have to extend the time to 7:25 min? Is this an issue?</p>

 

[fourthst]

<p>Peter, you only need to extend development about 10% (a starting point) if you dilute D-76 1:1 and develop it in a 8 oz tank. Alternately, you could put one loaded reel and one empty reel in a 16 oz tank and use 16 oz @1:1 and not need to extend development. That way you still have the required 8 oz stock developer per 80 sq in of film. I prefer that method. This all assumes you are using 35mm 36exp.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>You'll see little difference between D-76 (or ID-11) and HC-110 with Tri-X. The main difference, and still a relatively minor one, is a slight increase in acutance (edge sharpening effects) with very dilute D-76 (1+3) compared with HC-110. Otherwise, when I look back at hundreds of strips of Tri-X developed in both from the past 30 years I see no differences. Grain, tonality (whatever that means, I'm not sure anyone agrees), contrast... no apparent differences I can see between D-76/ID-11 at 1+1 and HC-110 at any dilution.</p>

<p>For the occasional darkroom session HC-110 may be the better choice, since the concentrate will be good for years. Under ideal conditions stock solution for D-76 or ID-11 is good for about six months. For someone who processes film every day or a few times a week, D-76 or ID-11 prepared as stock solution and either reused or diluted for one shot use might be the more economical choice. (Meticulous darkroom workers have noted some slight differences in the effective "strength" of D-76 over a six month span, but the effect would be negligible for most casual photographers using roll film.)</p>

<p>If HC-110 has any advantage over D-76, it may be slightly better suited to push processing (more than one stop) and developing older film. It seems to produce less fogging than D-76 when souping very old expired film. Not major differences, and probably of no consequence to folks who don't push process or develop old film.</p>

[peter_maschmeyer]

<p>Thank you all for your contribution to my questions! I want to come back to my initial question as the same fixer problem appeared again in the middle of a test row with relatively fresh fixer! Question: How do you fix your negs? I use Tetenal Rapidfixer 1+3 for 4 mins. As i couldn't find any instruction from Tetenal how to use it I just checked the internet. Somewhere i could read that I should use it like developer, meaning same agitation sequence. So for now I fix my negs for 4 min with 5 cycles every 30 secs. Is that the origin of my problem?? Do I have to agitate continuously? I can feel we are very close to solving the problem :-D Thank you in advance!<br /> Peter</p>

[amilograno]

<p>I think the prior posts answered your question, but FWIW I used Tri-X @ 400 in D-76 for probably 30 years. What worked for me was D-76 1:1 @ 68 degrees F in a 8 or 16 oz tank, agitation for the first 30 seconds and 5 seconds every 30 seconds. 30 second stop and then 4 minutes in Kodak rapid fixer. I felt that the 1:1 dilution minimized grain and increased sharpness.<br>

Tony</p>