From: Wendy Gollihue (wgolli@flash.net)
Date: 10/07/02-06:40:04 AM Z
jeff,
can you tell me more about the TriX-HC110 combination develper? Beginning
with how you shoot your film first (for this particular developer).
feel free to email me off list if you prefer.
wendy (TX)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey D. Mathias [mailto:jeffrey.d.mathias@att.net]
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 7:59 AM
To: alt-photo-process list
Subject: [Fwd: Pyro Schmyro]
Jeff Buck wrote:
> ...So, there then -- Why use pyro?
For myself, I like to have the control and consistent repeatability of
adjusting the development. I have found the Tri-X and HC-110
combination to satisfactorily provide for this.
I do not agree with Bob Herbst's inference that pyro gives the best
separation of highlight values, linear contrast or longer scale
negatives than all other film/developer combinations (I am sure it does
with some). However, with the Tri-X HC-110 I have been able to
reproduce N-4 to N+4 developments with great consistency and
occasionally N+5 (These are for Pt/Pd printing which would be even
higher contrast adjustments for Ag). These are very linear and
certainly can be the longest of scale. I get great highlight separation
and if I want to take full advantage of it print in Pd or "build" a new
negative.
I have tried pyro, but am not an expert with it. However, I have seen
many prints from both pyro development and other developers and must
agree with the comment attributed to Dick Arentz that good separation of
highlights can come from several film/developer combinations other than
exclusively pyro.
Pyro may be easier to use (in some minds) in that it, as Kerik Kouklis
states, is "very forgiving". However my preference is to not have a
"forgiving" developer but rather one that will respond in a consistent
and predictable manner to nuances I give to it.
It may be to some advantage to have a "thinner" negative as can be had
using pyro. However, when contact printing this seems to make little
difference. And I have found grain (such as that from a "normaly thick"
negative) to be useful in providing better sharpness in a Pt/Pd print.
So the answer to your question (like so many others) is: it is a mater
of personal preference. Both Kouklis and Arentz make the most wonderful
of prints, so discover what works best for you.
-- Jeffrey D. Mathias http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 11/14/02-02:40:26 PM Z CST