This won’t help but I don’t have access to the scans right now, I’m not at home.
But I just developed a roll of Tri-x in diafine for 3+3. I rated the Tri-x at 1000iso.
What I expected was a fairly flat negative with lots of scope to edit, potentially looking the same as Tri-x rated at box speed.
Whilst the scan did seem fairly flat albeit a little dark, adding contrast essentially removed a lot of the mid tones and crushed the blacks fast. I do like relatively contrasty black and white photos but I’ve pushed HP5 to 3200 before and developed it in Ilfotec HC and even that had more mid tones once I’d edited it to have some full white and black tones.
Then I remembered I used the Diafine straight away after mixing without warming it to 20 degrees. The water was so cold that I couldn’t hold my hand under it for too long.
Plus I also misread the data sheet and thought it listed Tri-x 400 as pushing to iso 1000, it actually read Tri-x 320…! However it lists Tri-x 400 as being pushed to 1600 with the same development time as 320 to 1000 so that’s probably safe.
It’s hard to say without seeing the scans but I can only think of 2 options. Either I under exposed the scans by a high margin, however as Tri-x400 pushes to 1600 based on the 3+3 development and I shot it at 1000 that’s probably not why, I technically gave it an extra half stop of light.
The second is that the developer was so cold that the film was underdeveloped.
Annoyingly I’m out of film for the moment so I can’t do anymore tests. I rarely use Tri-x so it’ll have to be HP5 next time
But I just developed a roll of Tri-x in diafine for 3+3. I rated the Tri-x at 1000iso.
What I expected was a fairly flat negative with lots of scope to edit, potentially looking the same as Tri-x rated at box speed.
Whilst the scan did seem fairly flat albeit a little dark, adding contrast essentially removed a lot of the mid tones and crushed the blacks fast. I do like relatively contrasty black and white photos but I’ve pushed HP5 to 3200 before and developed it in Ilfotec HC and even that had more mid tones once I’d edited it to have some full white and black tones.
Then I remembered I used the Diafine straight away after mixing without warming it to 20 degrees. The water was so cold that I couldn’t hold my hand under it for too long.
Plus I also misread the data sheet and thought it listed Tri-x 400 as pushing to iso 1000, it actually read Tri-x 320…! However it lists Tri-x 400 as being pushed to 1600 with the same development time as 320 to 1000 so that’s probably safe.
It’s hard to say without seeing the scans but I can only think of 2 options. Either I under exposed the scans by a high margin, however as Tri-x400 pushes to 1600 based on the 3+3 development and I shot it at 1000 that’s probably not why, I technically gave it an extra half stop of light.
The second is that the developer was so cold that the film was underdeveloped.
Annoyingly I’m out of film for the moment so I can’t do anymore tests. I rarely use Tri-x so it’ll have to be HP5 next time
