[pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
- From: Christopher Woodhouse <chris.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:27:29 +0000
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:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barrie Bunning" <barrieb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 2:06 PM
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
>
>
>> Greetings Chris; I have been a ' Tri-X ' user for many ,
>> many
>> years, The 400 Tri-x is basically an amateur
>> emulsion, good but the
>> 320 is the ' Pro ' film has a much better sensitivity
>> curve AND has been
>> the stock film for Professionals world wide for years.
>> Being an 'Old '
>> type emulsion it has a lot going for it , in my view it is
>> worth making ONE
>> of your standard film types. Cheers BarrieB.
>> At 07:05 AM 15/02/2005, you wrote:
>>> In my quest to find my film of choice and after comparing
>>> Tmax 400 with TriX
>>> I plumped on TriX. I then downloaded the latest Kodak
>>> datasheets and found
>>> to my amazement, two Tri X emulsions, TriX 400 and 320,
>>> which are available
>>> in different formats. I cannot begin to understand the
>>> weird reasoning
>>> behind this but would welcome any observations between the
>>> two emulsions.
>>>
>>> It would also seem that TriX 400 is not available in 5x4!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards Chris Woodhouse
>>>
> I disagree with the characterizations of the two
> emulsions. Tri-X roll film has a medium toe, long straight
> line characteristic suitable to general photograpy. The
> sheet film has a characteristic with rising contrast
> throughout. It certainly is made for "professional" use but
> is specified for studio use where flare can be controlled.
> That is because shadow contrast is comparitively low and any
> flare may lower it too much. Tri-X sheet film is useful
> where you want exagerated highlights. In comparison with a
> standard curve film like roll Tri-X or with 400 T-Max the
> mid gray tones will be rendered darker for a given highlight
> and shadow point. This is neither better or worse but may
> not be suitable for some subjects. Ilford HP-5, if it is
> still available, has a more nearly straight line curve as do
> the T-Max films. Fuji Acros is another long straight line
> film.
>
>
> ---
> 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.
>
--
Regards Chris Woodhouse
=============================================================================================================
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:
