Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,557   Posts: 1,573,269   Online: 998
      
Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 123

Thread: Tri-X vs. T-Max

  1. #81
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,503
    Images
    299

    Tri-X vs. T-Max

    It's all about the print, Mark. What else is there? Paper + developer has certain tonal characteristics, and if we don't learn how to work with our materials to fit those characteristics, then we miss a massive awful lot of potential. Trying to wrestle paper around negative characteristics is a huge compromise.

    Thank you for the kind words, by the way. I have a great deal of respect for you.
    "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

  2. #82
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    777
    Images
    15
    Xtol is massaging the grain a lot.. Edwal 12 is not far behind.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	f002_0072hc.gif 
Views:	45 
Size:	6.6 KB 
ID:	61536

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,006
    Edwal 12 has always been an interesting developer because it is fairly unique in its aim to produce extra-fine grain (lots of solvent action from both sulfite and PPD) with snappy contrast, so that you don't need to "overdevelop" for snap, which would otherwise destroy its extra fine grain properties. That differentiates it somewhat from the typical extra-fine grain D-23 variants like Microdol/Perceptol etc.

  4. #84
    Arcturus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    76
    I think that these types of film comparisons are like the "which premium lens is sharper" arguments that you mostly see with the digi crowd. While there are differences, they are so small or insignificant that the only way to tell them apart is to shoot test diagrams or pixel peep at 100,000x. Skill, subject, and circumstance have far more to do with how a photo looks than grain structure or characteristic curve.

  5. #85
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,503
    Images
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Xtol is massaging the grain a lot.. Edwal 12 is not far behind.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	f002_0072hc.gif 
Views:	45 
Size:	6.6 KB 
ID:	61536
    I would characterize Edwal 12 to have finer grain than Xtol, even, and it's very sharp.
    "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

  6. #86
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,503
    Images
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Edwal 12 has always been an interesting developer because it is fairly unique in its aim to produce extra-fine grain (lots of solvent action from both sulfite and PPD) with snappy contrast, so that you don't need to "overdevelop" for snap, which would otherwise destroy its extra fine grain properties. That differentiates it somewhat from the typical extra-fine grain D-23 variants like Microdol/Perceptol etc.
    The developer was designed for the sometimes flat Midwest light. The developer characteristics are remarkable, and suit portrait photography very well indeed. The PPD gives a lower pH, which activates the glycin to a level not present in normal glycin developers, which is part of why it does what it does. It isn't like anything else out there.
    "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

  7. #87
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    777
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcturus View Post
    .. Skill, subject, and circumstance have far more to do with how a photo looks than grain structure or characteristic curve.
    Read the 1st post and note that its a technical thread posted in Darkroom -> B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry....
    Crystallography, Chemistry and how Kodak tweaked (several times) a classic film like Tri-X is on topic.

  8. #88
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,503
    Images
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Read the 1st post and note that its a technical thread posted in Darkroom -> B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry....
    Crystallography, Chemistry and how Kodak tweaked (several times) a classic film like Tri-X is on topic.
    Right, what does 'better' mean anyway? 'Technically better' usually means 'boring' to me. You know, resolution and all that. Yawn. In the end it's just the opinion of one photographer, and why should we care what Steve Anchell's tastes are? It's up to us to decide for ourselves what we like, what suits our work flow, and what helps us express ourselves in the most optimal way.
    "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. #89
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    777
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    I would characterize Edwal 12 to have finer grain than Xtol, even, and it's very sharp.
    Yep, I just said not far behind if You catch my drift
    777 is another interesting soup.

  10. #90
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    777
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    Right, what does 'better' mean anyway? 'Technically better' usually means 'boring' to me. You know, resolution and all that. Yawn. In the end it's just the opinion of one photographer, and why should we care what Steve Anchell's tastes are? It's up to us to decide for ourselves what we like, what suits our work flow, and what helps us express ourselves in the most optimal way.
    Well, I didn't wrote 'better' or 'Technically better' or mentioned resolution, hence its hard to answer Your question.
    The OP asked about what Steve Anchell wrote about Tri-X and Tmax.. not what Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt think about Tri-X.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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