Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,677   Posts: 1,482,015   Online: 863
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterSense View Post
    I also heard that TXP was designed to be retouched, having a special base or something. Being a youth, I don't even know what film retouching is or how it's done, but that's what I heard.
    TXP, as said, is primarily a studio/portrait film. It is often used elsewhere with great success, but that's another story. Let's suppose you did a portrait of a person who has facial defects; scars, acne, mole, etc. A retoucher "paints" it away with dyes and a brush. TXP has a rough base so the dye will stick better. Now it's done with a mouse.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    50
    YOU DIP A POOR LITTLE MOUSE IN RETOUCHING DYE?

    SOMEONE CALL THE SPCA!!! SORRY:rolleyes:

  3. #13
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,001
    Images
    117
    TXP had beautiful grain and tones...

    *

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost View Post
    YOU DIP A POOR LITTLE MOUSE IN RETOUCHING DYE?

    SOMEONE CALL THE SPCA!!! SORRY:rolleyes:
    Mouse hair, squirrel hair - someone has to suffer for my art. Rather them than me

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mexico City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    597
    Images
    122
    I've been using TXP 320 in 220 rolls for a while, rated 200 ASA, developed in D76 1:1... and TX 400 in 35mm rolls, rated 320 ASA and developed in D76 1:1... in my experience TXP has less fog and wider tonal range... TXP is hard to find, I have to special order it.
    Jose A. Martinez

  6. #16
    Rick-in-LB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Long Beach CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    51
    Images
    5
    Ok now for my uneducated question. Who would one film have more fog than the other. I always thought fogging came from light on your film due to mishandling

  7. #17
    Wade D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Jamul, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    877
    Images
    3
    I would think there should be no fog on TX or TXP unless there are light leaks in the camera or developing tank. Assuming that the film is loaded into developing tanks in total darkness. Age fog would be a problem only with out of date film. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Rick-in-LB View Post
    Ok now for my uneducated question. Who would one film have more fog than the other. I always thought fogging came from light on your film due to mishandling
    My guess is that we're talking b+f - the inherent density of unexposed but developed film. i.e. TriX has a higher base plus fog density than TriX-P.

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mexico City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    597
    Images
    122
    Right, TXP has less B+F density.
    Jose A. Martinez

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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