Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,545   Posts: 1,572,844   Online: 1002
      
Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 61011121314151617 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 164
  1. #151
    Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    MiltON.ONtario
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    105
    Price drop? On previous Thursday I purchased single roll of Tri-X. From Henry's store, $10
    Last one, for me.
    my Film Flickr. aslo, using enlarger, in the darkroom.

  2. #152

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Controlled Crystal Growth. But essentially yes, Delta 400 is a "new tech" film closest to TMY and HP5+ is more comparable to Tri-X. Delta 400 is not as fine grained as TMY but finer than Tri-X or HP5+. Like other "new style" films it's responsive to development and may take more dialing in but it's a nice film. You'll provably like it.


    Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk using 100% recycled electrons. Because I care.
    Hi Roger

    So you get the grain in TMY finer than Delta after you have shot both?

    I'll be trying some if you say yes...

    I like grain for the gritty street shots but some days...

    Noel

  3. #153

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,912
    Images
    65
    I'm not Roger but having used TMY-2 and Delta 400 I would suspect the Kodak film does have finer grain, processed in XTOL.

    Tom

  4. #154

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post
    I'm not Roger but having used TMY-2 and Delta 400 I would suspect the Kodak film does have finer grain, processed in XTOL.

    Tom
    Hi Tom

    Thanks I'll try some next week then. I use HP5+ with microphen or Rodinal for soft toe.

    But I sometimes I have light to spare...

    This Sunday used a PanF cassette @ midday with large white fluffy reflectors in sky 125@/5.6

    Neopan 400 did not seem much different from Delta BTW.

    Most of my images are 'gritty' anyway.

  5. #155
    Dr Croubie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,491
    Images
    2
    I've just been looking at some of my shots, TX vs TMY both in Xtol scanned at 3200dpi, I'm having trouble seeing the differences in grain sizes there.
    If you can see the difference between Delta 400 and TMY then you must be scanning/enlarging absolutely huge or have a lot better trained eyes than me...
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

    f/64 and be there.

  6. #156
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,137

    Kodak Tri-x Price Drops

    It's been many many years since I shot Delta 400 but I did and I could see a difference mainly under the enlarger with a grain magnifier. Not a lot but visible. It would be really hard to see a difference in grain in most prints, granted.

    Neither is the film for you if you want more and visible grain. For that I might go to Foma 400. You'll see a difference there.


    Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk using 100% recycled electrons. Because I care.

  7. #157

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,401
    HiRoger

    Ok Thanks

    I do use Forma 400 for grain - If you like grain it is 'nicer' than Kentmere 400 or Hp5+.

    But for some shots I want less and use Delta400, Neopan400 or Delta100.

    I'll try a cassette of the Kodak and the grain focus tools.

    Noel

  8. #158

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Ringerike, Norway
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    157
    A random google search took me to this article, which discusses resolution and grain size of Kodak films at great length, and complains about people and film makers confusing grain with particle size. (They argue that grain is apparent clumping of particles, and grains are much larger than particles.)
    http://cool.conservation-us.org/cool...resolution.pdf

  9. #159
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,764
    Images
    225
    I can see that, ^^ especially considering Eastman Double-X, it's a great film, but it's claimed to have good resolution or grains per line or whatever the calculation is, but in reality it "appears" fairly grainy (though gives beautiful tones) that always confused me until you said clumping of grains, so perhaps that's what's being confused. Thanks!
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #160
    markaudacity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
    Price drop? On previous Thursday I purchased single roll of Tri-X. From Henry's store, $10
    Last one, for me.
    You'll always pay an outrageous markup buying film in a brick-and-mortar these days.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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