Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,276   Posts: 1,534,734   Online: 891
      
Page 1 of 29 123456711 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 284
  1. #1
    rubyfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    166

    In a world without Tri-X...

    So, I had a bit of a panic today. None of my usual sources had Tri-X 120 in stock. NONE. Normally, I'd be all zen and just wait for it to be available, but I actually need it by the 19th. Eventually I did find it, for more than I'd prefer, but those in need have to take what they can get. But I did ponder what I would have used instead.

    My first thought was T-Max. But while I like T-Max for certain things, it would not have given me the look I wanted. At least, not the way I normally shoot it. I've only used Ilford and Kodak BNW film; maybe I'm missing out?

    What would you use if you wanted to use Tri-X but couldn't? Would you change how you shot or developed?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,133
    Images
    290
    I would learn to rough up T-Max 400 a bit, or maybe HP5+ would be better. I'm sure you could get pretty close but you would certainly need to change your exposure/development routine to get there.

  3. #3
    winger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Page County, IA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,405
    Images
    47
    I would likely use HP5+. It isn't exactly the same, but it's a little closer, imo, than TMax. Though I do like TMax, too. I just think there's a little more space for being slightly "wrong" with exposure with HP5+ and Tri-X as compared to the TMax and Delta lines.
    While I'm sure this sounds like heresy to many, I'm usually trying to get a "look" based more on the subject and lighting than on any small differences between types of film. Once it's hanging on the wall, I doubt many people will be able to tell what I used.

  4. #4
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    HP5. I'd also assume in this situation that if Tri-x were unavailable then Tmax would be as we'll. HP5 is a fantastic film, I prefer it to Tri-x. I have a feeling that may be a reality too soon with the way kodak is going.

  5. #5
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    748
    Images
    33
    HP5+ in a heartbeat. I use them interchangeably already, so it wouldn't be the end of the world.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  6. #6
    pstake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    704
    Images
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    HP5+ in a heartbeat. I use them interchangeably already, so it wouldn't be the end of the world.
    It would be at least similar to the end of the world!

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    B&H photo always has it in stock and you can easily order it and have it by the 19th at a more than decent price.

  8. #8
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,999
    Ilford HP5+ is a nice film but, to my mind it is nothing at all like Tri-X!
    Faced with the inability to buy Tri-X, I'd go for Ilford FP4+

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by BradS View Post
    Ilford HP5+ is a nice film but, to my mind it is nothing at all like Tri-X!
    Faced with the inability to buy Tri-X, I'd go for Ilford FP4+
    ditto

  10. #10
    jp498's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Owls Head ME
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,467
    Images
    74
    What are you shooting?

    For people, the spectral sensitivity of tmax400 is different than tri-x and could be a bit different, but not insurmountable.

    For landscape, I've seen many Tri-x photos that seem fairly interchangable with tmax 400.

    I keep a stockpile of what I need for film. Your credit card might get stolen and you wouldn't be able to order, you could have a financial emergency and not be able to buy film. There could a be a storm or natural disaster or terror event preventing shipping.

Page 1 of 29 123456711 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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