[pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:21:11 -0800
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Woodhouse" <chris.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 12:27 PM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
> So, even with a roll-off type type developer like Microdol
> X, Tri X320 in
> 5x4 is not going to be suitable for landscape work on
> anything but the
> dullest day. That was a near miss, thanks. Looks like I'm
> down to the Tmax's
> and Acros that are available in 120 and 5x4 if I'm going
> to give Ilford the
> heave-ho.
>
>
> On 15/2/05 12:55 am, "Richard Knoppow"
> <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
It depends on the landscape. Tri-X will produce very
dramatic pictures of subjects like white-capped waves and
snow on mountains. I've used Plus-X for general 8x10 work
because I was able to buy a large stash of the stuff
outdated many years ago. The pictures look OK but I liked
Agfapan better.
Microdol-X does not act as a compensating developer,
i.e., does not shoulder off. Perhaps it does in high
dilutions. At 1:3 it becomes an acutance developer but is no
longer any finer grained than D-76 (of no consequence for
LF). Actually, I always liked the results I got from
Microdol-X.
I think you have to shoot some Tri-X sheet and, perhaps
shoot the same images with something else, and compar the
two to see the difference. It may be pretty subtle.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
