Poll: Tmax400 (TMY-2) vs Tri-X Pro (320TXP), which do you favor more?

[Sal Santamaura]

...I like the long straight line of TMY for some things, but end up printing a lot of the TMX negs when I have duplicates...

I suspect Doremus meant to type "320TXP" and not "TMX" in this part of his post.

[RodinalDuchamp]

I haven't votes yet but I enjoy the look and results I can repeatably get from Tri-x. Tmy2 is a great film but I will be sticking with tri-x for the long haul

[StoneNYC]

I use both films about equally, so I won't vote (since I can't vote for both...). Often I have the two films loaded back-to-back in the same holder.

I like the long straight line of TMY for some things, but end up printing a lot of the TMX negs when I have duplicates. It's a great film for many subjects. The long toe keeps some shadow detail, even without a lot of separation, and the mid-tone separation is then often gratifyingly good.

Best,

Doremus

Wait you mean you make dupes using TMX? Thanks!

[Sal Santamaura]

I suspect Doremus meant to type "320TXP" and not "TMX" in this part of his post.

Wait you mean you make dupes using TMX? Thanks!

No, he was likely referring to the procedure he described, i.e. having TMY-2 and 320TXP loaded back to back in the same holder and, therefore, ending up with two negatives of the same scene (one on each film). His typing TMX was probably a typo.

[StoneNYC]

I voted. I don't currently buy either. I saw the poll and it made sense for me to vote since I have used both films in the past. Then I read your long string of rules. Next time you might consider including a note in the title; something along the lines of "please read rules first."

Sorry, I expected people would be prudent and read the first post before voting on the poll. Alas I forget people get excited about polls, well it happens, it's not like I work for Kodak, just generally curious, hopefully the resulting data will be mostly accurate from enough current users of the film that we will have some idea about who is buying kodak fast films in sheet form and still consuming it, and which they prefer. Thanks for the honest post.

[StoneNYC]

No, he was likely referring to the procedure he described, i.e. having TMY-2 and 320TXP loaded back to back in the same holder and, therefore, ending up with two negatives of the same scene (one on each film). His typing TMX was probably a typo.

OH! Yes that makes sense, I thought he was saying "dupes" in a different way. That's actually not a bad idea... Hmm, maybe I'll do that with my Acros100 shots, dupe them on Delta100 haha! Then I can Dupe my TMY-2 shots on HP5+ for a different contrast, interesting thought. Expensive, but so is ending up missing a shot with only one frame taken instead of having a backup!

Or just buy even more TMY-2! Haha

I'm glad we still have options even though they may be hard decisions it's still good to have options while they last.

[Drew Bedo]

FWIW:

I like Tri-X more.

[StoneNYC]

I owe Jeff an apology and have corrected my above statement on the subject of reading the info before voting on a poll, I have offended him unintentionally and wanted to publicly apologize for that.

I'm often told my harsher NY/CT online demeanor doesn't translate the same for those from other parts of the country/world, I meant no insult but I did offend and so I wanted to apologize to Jeff and any others I inadvertently offended.

~Stone

[Andrew O'Neill]

Tri-X and TMY-2 are difference creatures. If one were dropped by Kodak, which would be missed more? That would've been a better pole. I would miss TMY-2. Which one is more expensive to produce? I suspect TMY-2 is and that may be reason for Kodak to eliminate it. But what do I know...

[jp]

Tri-x is more expensive in roll film, and less expensive as sheet film. Makes no sense to me. Except maybe (speculating) tri-x is more popular as roll film so they charge more, and tmy2 is more popular as sheet film so they charge more. Look at Canham's orders; for B&W film it's been tmax.