Dear CJ Beckem
Tri-X 320...from ILFORD Photo : Its not possible I am afraid, firstly Tri-X is a superb film, always has been....but our 400 speed conventional film is HP5+ which we love and which we prefer. Many people will prefer Tri-X and thats absolutely AOK because its gives all photographers a choice.....
Our photo manufacturing philosophy is very clear : we strive to keep everything available that we have now in the ILFORD Monochrome brand, this is currently about 2,600 SKU's Paper / Film / Chemistry & accessories which is more than all the other monochrome film and paper makers combined. This enables choice, and also a connected family of products in the range of formats required, this is very challenging to do as we have had to adabt our whole manufacturing and supply chain to be able to deliver this philosophy, this also makes us as a business, profitable and stable.
Whilst we will always make new products, like MULTIGRADE Art 300 duplicating existing products from other manufacturers would increase our SKU's but our sales ?......
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Coming from the other direction - I have always used Ilford films and in 400 used HP5+.
About 18 months ago someone gave me a huge box of Tri-X. Too good a gift to give up - I went forth and photographed with it - and made a right pigs breakfast of the first few films. I found it very different to HP5+ - for a start when developed it seems to build up a lot more density very quickly. I knew I could push HP5+ to compensate for flat light quite easily - the same trick with Tri-x with similar increases in time and I had negatives so dense I couldn't print them.
It took me a while and quite a few film tests to get to grips with Tri-X. Now I have got my times and a few developer regimes sorted out I can get very nice results with it. Although the films behave a bit differently, if handled appropriately I think the resulting prints can be very similar.
I am using Tri-X 400. I have no experience of Tri-X 320.
Are we saying that Tri-X 320 gives results that HP5+ would be unable to replicate?
That sounds like a challenge.
Kodak film division seems to be doing better than expected these days, but whether they will bring back Tri-X 320 is probably too big a task. I like both films, and have used both with decent results, but with different subject matter. I'm just glad that Ilford seems to be pulling hard for the film photographer while Kodak seems to be flailing around a bit trying to please too many markets. I say let Kodak consolidate what they must until their film division can work as a profit center to help keep the company afloat. Until then, I just bought 20 boxes of HP5+ 135-36 to continue my support of Ilford and a great film.
Yes, probably crazy but... well actually, is it really that odd that this may happen? They have released the new pinhole camera that takes 4x5 d/d's. They have released a positive paper, they custom make films sizes (at least once a year!)...
Like others have suggested, getting a film to look like Tri-X 320 isn't terribly difficult.
Originally Posted by cjbecker
I did an experiment a couple of winters ago when TXP was being discontinued. Please read it.
"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
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I really enjoy working with HP5+ and have recommended it to my photography students
thats the reason that I like to use ilford, things like your philosophy. It is no that i wanted a film exactly like tri-x 320. I just want a film that has the long toe, steep shoulder and the straight shoulder with ilford's touch. I want that film in all sizes which would make it the best.
Originally Posted by Simon R Galley
I will keep testing hp5 and see where I can get it.
Understood, and sorry I spelt your name incorrectly !
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
IMHO it would be a good idea for Ilford's technical people to try to solve Clark's (and others') requirements using the products they already have in hand.
If Ilford could "develop" a developing regime, using an appropriate Ilford film, developer, temperature and agitation regime so as to shape the curve to provide the long toe, steep straight section and appropriate shoulder that Clark is looking for, they could publish that information on their website, and promote it here .
Of course, Kodak could do the very same thing, referencing Kodak materials - although we all know what the likelihood would be of Kodak promoting the results here on APUG
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2