Tri-X in Diafine

[photophorous]

Diafine is a different beast. It's a two-part compensating developer, which means you don't worry about development times and temperatures...as much. The most important consideration with Diafine is shooting the film at the correct ISO rating, and the "correct" ISO rating with most films is different than the manufacturers rating. It's usually faster, but not always. Since I couldn't find an official Diafine website with a data page to link here, I'll just write what's on the box.

The makers of Diafine suggest the following for Tri-X:

Tri-X Pan (TX) - 35mm and Roll...........1600 ISO
Tri-X Pan Pro (TXP/TXT) - Roll.............1000 ISO
Tri-X Pan Pro (TXP/TXT) - Sheet..........1200 ISO

General instructions for Diafine say it may be used within a temperature range of 70 to 85 degrees F, with a minimum time of 3 minutes in each solution. Increased development times will have no practical effect on the results.

Developing Procedure:

Do Not Pre-soak films.

1. Immerse film in Diafine Solution A for at least 3 minutes, agitating very gently for the first 5 seconds and for 5 seconds at 1 minute intervals.
2. Drain, but do not rinse.
3. Immerse film in Diafine Solution B for at least 3 minutes, agitating very gently for the first 5 seconds and for 5 seconds at 1 minute intervals.
4. Drain and rinse in plain water for about 30 seconds. The use of an acid stop-bath is NOT recommended.
5. Fix, wash, and dry in the usual manner.

Optimum results are obtained if all solutions, including the wash, are maintained at the same temperature. CARE MUST BE EXERCISED TO PREVENT ANY AMOUNT OF DIAFINE SOLUTION B FROM ENTERING DIAFINE SOLUTION A.

[photophorous]

Film Name: Kodak Tri-X Pan (TX)
Film Format: 35mm, 36 exp
Actual EI: 1250 ISO
Contrast level: This combo produces low contrast negatives in all but the highest contrast scenes.
Presoak: No
Developer Name: Diafine
Developer Dilution: Stock
Developer Temp: not sure...about 75 degrees, probably.
Developing Time: a little less than 4 minutes in each solution.
Time Measurement Technique: From start of pour-in to start of pour-out...pouring as fast as possible.
Tank Size: single roll, 35mm
Tank Type: stainless steel
Tank Fill Level: I try to leave a little air gap above the film to let the developer slosh around during agitation.
Agitation Technique: 4 or 5 inversions (with quarter turn) per 10 seconds, every minute.
Stop Bath: Water. Fill, agitate for 30 secs, drain, refill, and agitate for another 30 seconds.
Output: Film scanner.
Subject Matter Comments: This combo produced results that are a little more grainy than TriX at 400 ISO in D76 1:1. The negatives are thin and low contrast, which works well if you're shooting high contrast scenes, but looks way too flat for low contrast scenes.
Notes for next time: Meter carefully, and shoot high contrast scenes only. Try it at 1600 to see if contrast increases.


I caught my brother sleeping on the recliner with is dog Dexter on Christmas Eve. All I did to the full frame shot was spot out some dust with the clone tool, and resize. The second is a 100% crop from a 4000 dpi scan, straight from the scanner.

Paul

[MyLittleLeica]

I love that grain.
I would like to try Diafine, but I can't find here in Japan

[Xia_Ke]

Damn, that's 35mm Tri-X at 1250??? That's some fine grain for pushed Tri-X. Thanks for the great write up Paul. Added this to the B&W Film/Developer Database Index.

[photophorous]

I love that grain.
I would like to try Diafine, but I can't find here in Japan

I think I got mine from B&H, but I'm not sure if they'll ship it to Japan. I mixed this batch almost exactly a year before I developed this roll. You can reuse it and it lasts a long time.

[photophorous]

Damn, that's 35mm Tri-X at 1250??? That's some fine grain for pushed Tri-X. Thanks for the great write up Paul. Added this to the B&W Film/Developer Database Index.

I'm not sure what to think of the grain at this point. It doesn't seem to big, but something seems harsh about it to me. I have a lot more experimenting to do before I feel like I can really say how it compares to other alternatives. Right now, my biggest beef with this combo is the extremely low contrast results. You can't tell in this shot, because the lighting was very harsh so it worked well, but shots taken in flat lighting look way too flat. I guess that would mean this combo would be good for shooting a concert or something similar, but it also requires careful metering, because you can't really adjust development.

[mtbbrian]

Good stuff Paul! Thanks for sharring!
Brian