Plus-X Developing Times?

[mr_x]

Hi,

It's all right - it's not a voice from the beyond :lol: i found a couple of Plus-X cartridges stashed away. I work out the standard D-76 time for developing Tri-X is 8 minutes @ 20ºC while Plus-X is (or was) 5&1/2 minutes @ 20ºC. Does this sound about right please?

Thanks,

Ric

[71er]

I reverse develop Plus-X and Tri-X both the same time: 6 to 7 minutes with the first development, depending on how often I had used the developer (D-94 I use) already (1st film 6 min, 2nd 6,5 min, 3rd 7 min). Always worked well.

[mr_x]

I reverse develop Plus-X and Tri-X both the same time: 6 to 7 minutes with the first development, depending on how often I had used the developer (D-94 I use) already (1st film 6 min, 2nd 6,5 min, 3rd 7 min). Always worked well.

Many thanks.

'First development'? I only use 1st & 2nd developers for (Foma) reversal. Using D-76 gives me a negative print and I discard the developer afterwards, I didn't think you could reuse it?

Bests,

Ric

[71er]

Sorry, I figured only a bit after writing my last post that you wanted to do negatives. Ofcourse, D-76 wouldn't produce enough contrast for reversal.
For developer - film - time charts go to: www.digitaltruth.com

[mr_x]

Thanks Alex,

Digitaltruth gives about 5.5 minutes ~ I guesstimated on 6. Here's what I got.

http://youtu.be/gK5mp0QXCcA

Bests,

Ric

[71er]

Developing time looks fine to me. Why are the turbines turning the wrong way round?

[aj]

Developing time looks fine to me. Why are the turbines turning the wrong way round?

Teleciné without using a mirror?

The appearance and design seems OK.
Contrast is rather poor and where did the sharpness go? There isn't any.

[mr_x]

Developing time looks fine to me. Why are the turbines turning the wrong way round?

Teleciné without using a mirror?

The appearance and design seems OK.
Contrast is rather poor and where did the sharpness go? There isn't any.

That's the effect I always get with D-76 negatives inverted in software. I quite like it, and the scratches too, real - not a dv filter effect. What caused the scratches I don't know, that film dates back to 2009. It is possible I damaged the film removing it from the Super 8 cartridges. Recently I have begun experimenting with Standard 8, which is much easier to unload, it's a synch.

Digital video is nice and sharp, but it doesn't really appeal to me. I think some of the professional film-makers actually fit soft filters to their video cameras to lessen the harshness of digital video?

Thanks,

Ric

[mr_x]

Developing time looks fine to me. Why are the turbines turning the wrong way round?

Because I didn't switch the image round in the software: well spotted! :lol:

[mr_x]

Teleciné without using a mirror? ... Contrast is rather poor and where did the sharpness go? There isn't any.

Hi AJ,

Here's an even worse example :mrgreen:

http://youtu.be/zcTDVRaJdGk

'The Room' was processed the same way in D76, then inverted in software. Cheating I know, but what the hell, this is real film, I get a kick out of using it, I wouldn't even have attempted to make this short as a video, what would be the point - ninety percent of the interest here is the atmosphere and tactile quality of the print for me.

'Old Wardour' on the other hand was developed with Foma chemistry, so I ended up with a positive print: http://youtu.be/7bLPYTgfQas

Both films were captured to dv by reversing a 16mm cine lens onto the dv cam. This turns any lens into a macro lens, almost like using a dv microscope instead of a dv camcorder.

Next you position the d-i-y macro lens as close to the film gate as you can - you are now videoing raw film as it passes through the projector film gate. Ideally this imagery will need to be flipped horizontally in the edit software.

So no, I use no mirror. I used to use a mirror when I used the 'aerial transfer' capture method - cam on a tripod - but direct capture is slightly easier to maintain due to the added stability of the cam on a solid surface.

Hope this helps - actually, I don't really know what teleciné is - apart from it being widely advertised in a commercial film transfer context - I have never used it: how does it work please - a new thread? ;)

Thanks again,

Ric

[aj]

I am glad you enjoy yourself.

I wouldn't spend all this effort and money to film through a heavily fogged window
The charm of a small grain itself is enough.

Good luck!

[mr_x]

I am glad you enjoy yourself.

I wouldn't spend all this effort and money to film through a heavily fogged window
The charm of a small grain itself is enough.

Good luck!

Thanks André,

I can well appreciate how those of us who are devoted to photographic emulsion are a total mystery to the vast majority out there! ;)

Season's greetings -

Ric