Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,909   Posts: 1,521,565   Online: 792
      
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 89

Thread: Good old Tri-X

  1. #21
    Terry Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    535
    Images
    15
    A yearly convention I attend each year will be celebrating its thirtieth (XXX) anniversary this year. Given how Kodak has been in the financial headlines lately, and I frankly haven't had the chance to shoot much Tri-X so far, I'm thinking about using Tri-X exclusively this year. The anniversary fits and I could really use some immersion in just one film. Last year I shot mostly TMax and Portra NC.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    376
    Great portraits with Rodinal and Tri X 320. I haven't used the 400.

  3. #23
    Guillaume Zuili's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles & Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,639
    Images
    216
    It's the first film I learnt to use. And it became the benchmark. Whatever film I would try I would always go back to Tri-X or TXP.
    With very few exceptions, Delta 3200 and Verichrome.
    It works in so many situations, so many developers. Tonal range, skin tone, grain, you name it.

    As Br549 says... An old friend.
    G.

  4. #24
    Newt_on_Swings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,782
    Just ordered 60 rolls of tri-x as arista premium for my students last week which came in earlier this week. Great stuff and easy to shoot and obtain good results for beginners too. Last time we went through a good amount of hp5+ as it was 2for1, also good results.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,066
    Tri-x and the Leica - I had two M3's and the 35, 50, and 90 summicrons in college (early 70's) and everything I shot was Tri-x and Rodinal. People used to say, "isn't that a lot of grain?" And I used to say, "yes, equal to the amount of image."
    Like others, I've been using Delta and HP-5 the last couple of years (still haven't settled on which), but Tri-x is hard to replace.

  6. #26
    MaximusM3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    756
    Images
    6
    There isn't anything else like it, period. Versatile, pliable, incredible dynamic range, tone, grain. There is nothing it cannot do and do well. What more do you need?

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    It is a great film. However, I've gone in the other direction as you. I find TMY-2 to be fantastic. Just as flexible in different lighting conditions in my mind. I never got the 'fussy' nature of T-Max; I pretty much treat it exactly as I did Tri-X and get very useable negatives. I also don't get the 'digital' comments about TMY. Looks like film to me.

    Tri-X does have a bit more grain and texture for me, but often not enough. Overall, I find it to be pretty fine grained. The increase in texture is little enough that when I am going for that, I often grab TMZ instead.

    Maybe I need to change my processing

  8. #28
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,164
    Images
    289
    I agree with everything you said, except for the added texture in my prints, which is more significant to me than it seems to be to you.
    That goes in the department of personal flavor. But TMY-2 sure looks like film to me too, with lots of beautiful character, contrast, and substance. It is also very flexible, and like you I don't find it any more difficult to process than Tri-X. It honestly puzzles me why some find it to look clinical and 'digital', but each to their own and I hope we can all find something we like.

    Let me make it clear, I would happily continue shooting TMY-2, and if it wasn't for Tri-X, I would. The difference between them is not that great, a lot less than most folks make it out to be (to my eyes anyway). That's all. I was just looking to see what other Tri-X lovers held as their reason for rating it above all other films.

    So, happy shooting everyone! It was fun to read your responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Gray View Post
    It is a great film. However, I've gone in the other direction as you. I find TMY-2 to be fantastic. Just as flexible in different lighting conditions in my mind. I never got the 'fussy' nature of T-Max; I pretty much treat it exactly as I did Tri-X and get very useable negatives. I also don't get the 'digital' comments about TMY. Looks like film to me.

    Tri-X does have a bit more grain and texture for me, but often not enough. Overall, I find it to be pretty fine grained. The increase in texture is little enough that when I am going for that, I often grab TMZ instead.

    Maybe I need to change my processing
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  9. #29
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,164
    Images
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by MaximusM3 View Post
    There isn't anything else like it, period. Versatile, pliable, incredible dynamic range, tone, grain. There is nothing it cannot do and do well. What more do you need?
    Tri-X is the perfect companion for me. True dat. But, how about a cup of great coffee?
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    I agree with everything you said, except for the added texture in my prints, which is more significant to me than it seems to be to you.
    That goes in the department of personal flavor.
    I actually like more texture in my prints, but at 11x14 or smaller, I don't really find that much more texture in my prints using Tri-X. And I never print larger thatnt 11x14. I think it might be my processing in XTOL? I don't know. It's actually something that's bugged me for quite a while, getting a bit more texture, which is why I shot Tri-X for the first 3-4 years I shot film, but it never gave me the extra grit I wanted. So I turned to TMZ for my fix I've toyed with trying Rodinal, but haven't gotten around to it yet.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin