Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,540   Posts: 1,544,290   Online: 857
      
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    imazursky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    New Rochelle, NY 10804
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    108
    Images
    3

    Tir-x Aerographic 2403

    Hi Guys,

    I just got a roll of Kodak Tri-x Aerographic #2403 9.5"x125'.
    I'm going to cut it down for my 12x20 with some modifications to the holder.

    Has anyone used this type of film before and does it have the same characteristics as regular trix?
    Can i shoot it at 320 and develop it like trix?

    Thanks!
    -ian mazursky nyc
    www.prepressexpress.com PrePress for photographers.
    www.ianmazursky.com Travel, Landscape, Portraits and my 12x20 diary

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    311
    This is aerial film that was used by the military and in natural resources work. I can't find this film listed in the current Kodak aerial catalogue so it's probably discontinued. I don't know if it can be exposed or processed like ordinary terrestrial Tri-x. Maybe send an e-mail to the folks on the Kodak Aerial Film website.

    Jim B.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Van Buren, Arkansas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,412
    Images
    101
    Unless is has a Rem-Jet backing, like movie film does, then it can be processed conventionally, just like any film. I would start with the published times for Tri-X and make adjustments from there, based on your individual shooting style. If it were completely different from Tri-X, they wouldn't call it Tri-X.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,052
    As I recall, it works pretty much like regular Tri-X. It is a quite different film however. There are two things you may need to watch out for: it's a lot thinner than sheet film; it's more contrasty than regular Tri-X.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    IIRC, most of these aerographic films have increased red sensitivity. Better to cut through atmospheric haze when using a yellow or red filter. That would account for the apparently higher contrast observed when using these films.

  6. #6
    Murray@uptowngallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Holland, MI
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    1,028
    I have 2402. You should be able to find Kodak datasheet online for 2403.

    I think yours might be 0.004" or 0.0025" thickness. Sheet is typ 0.007-0.010 depending on size and what kind of film, so you may have flatness issues (unless you're shooting pinhole).

    The film speed is another issue. They rate it for ISO-A (A being aerial). The spectrum is alot different looking from the sky than terrestrially.

    I was told by someone at Kodak_Aerial to multiply the Aerial ISO by 2.5 for terrestrial for a very approximate estimate but everyone I know uses 2402 at 80-100 instead of 500, so I think the person gave me wrong info or I musunderstood (I don't think so, but it's possible).

    I have run into people who really like the extended red aerial films for portraiture, but they were using 70 mm in a proper back.

    You can use 'regular' developer as opposed to the high temp high speed stuff that you'll find on the datasheet, but this plus the film speed question suggest you should find your own ISO and development characteristics.

    I have not used my 2402 yet but send some to two different people to try for me. One shot one image in a superwide pinhole cam and with the drastic falloff it was hard to tell much, and the other guy never got back to me.
    Murray

  7. #7
    John Bartley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    13 Critchley Avenue, PO Box 36, Monteith Ont, P0K1P0
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,397
    Apparently 2403 Aerographic was replaced by SO-050 Tri-X Aerocon which has the same properties.

    See Kodak publication : http://www.kodak.com/eknec/documents...winter2005.pdf

    I couldn't find anything on it though.

    cheers

  8. #8
    John Bartley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    13 Critchley Avenue, PO Box 36, Monteith Ont, P0K1P0
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Murray@uptowngallery View Post
    I have 2402. .....
    I was told by someone at Kodak_Aerial to multiply the Aerial ISO by 2.5 for terrestrial for a very approximate estimate but everyone I know uses 2402 at 80-100 instead of 500, so I think the person gave me wrong info or I musunderstood (I don't think so, but it's possible) .....

    My experience is a bit like everyone elses except that I rate it even slower. 2402 has an aerial ISO of 200 according to the Kodak spec sheet. I bought mine from mrfoto1 on eBay ( a really nice guy!!) and his advice was to use half the aerial ISO for a land speed (so rate it at 100). I tried that and for enlarging it might be ok, but I was using it for contact prints on AZO and I found that at 100 the negatives were quite thin. I started decreasing the rated speed as I took more photos (not a very scientific way to do it, but it worked for me) and I found myself pleased with the results I got when I rated it at 25. On AZO grade two, I am getting average contact print exposure times of approx 60 seconds with a ten watt halogen desk lamp at 24" above the frame.

  9. #9
    imazursky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    New Rochelle, NY 10804
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    108
    Images
    3
    Thanks for the suggestions.
    Last night or was this morning (2am) i made a rig to cut the film.
    It consists of a rotary cutter (fiskars) and a speed easel to act as a stop. I took some 11x14 sheets of color enlarging paper
    and taped it down on the bed of the cutter. I hope it will cut down on any scratching.
    I got some 4x5 sheets out of it. Its so thin that it took me almost 2 minutes to load 2 of them into the holders.
    My plan is to shoot some today and see where it takes me. I will go for a 25, 50, 100, 200, 320 approach and see if i come close.
    Then its a red filter and the whole magillah all over.

    When the weather is warmer here, i will cut some down for the 12x20 and make a sabot for the holder.
    The lab i use for my e-6 and c-41 has 12x20 racks for there B&W D&D. Xtol only. Hopefully they can fit this film into them.
    I dont have any trays large enough to fit 9.5x20. Also my darkroom is only really dark after midnight.

    Thanks again!
    -ian mazursky nyc
    www.prepressexpress.com PrePress for photographers.
    www.ianmazursky.com Travel, Landscape, Portraits and my 12x20 diary



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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