I wanted to test the capacity of this concentrate compared to XTOL. Kodak recommends at least 100 ml of XTOL be used per roll. So I used 100 ml, with 1+1 dilution (200 ml total), for 9 min at 20C (per the MDC). And same with the concentrate. Density-graph and scan-crops are below for Tri-X. The graph is interesting: It shows that under this capacity-stressing condition, the concentrate performed a hair better than XTOL, in that the densities of midtones and highlights are slightly higher. But so slight that folks would probably not notice the difference. Grain and sharpness look the same to me.


Consistent with the graph, the leaders were 2.03 for XTOL, and 2.07 for the concentrate.

Frame 20: Xtol: trix-xtol-crop20.jpg Concen: trix-conc-crop20.jpg
Frame 21: Xtol: trix-xtol-crop21.jpg Concen: trix-conc-crop21.jpg
Frame 22: Xtol: trix-xtol-crop22.jpg Concen: trix-conc-crop22.jpg

This test also provides a second comparison of emulsions with conventional grains (ie, not T-grain).

A question for PE: The low densities in the graph and leaders imply underdevelopment, yet the short toe implies normal development. Can you explain this paradox?

Mark Overton