Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Tri-x 320 or 400?

  1. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    8,640

    Tri-x 320 or 400?

    John, I don't have my oldest Kodak literature handy, but I believe Royal pan was not the same as Royal-X pan.

    I don't know whether Quad-X would be twice as good, but it would certainly be twice as X...

  2. #12

    Tri-x 320 or 400?

    Does anyone have a technical data sheet for the Royal-X Pan film? I'm looking for the spectral response curve.

  3. #13

    Tri-x 320 or 400?

    I no longer have the data sheets for Royal-X, but I used it extensively for about a year in the mid 80's in 120 size to document the goings-on in the Engineering Department in the battleship USS Iowa (BB-61), where I served as a division officer. The spectral response, whatever it was, produced results that were indistinguishable from slower speed films of the day.

    I really miss this film. Paired with the Linhof Technika IV that I was using, this was an unbeatable combination for producing high-quality results with the atrocious lighting conditions that I encountered. I processed all film in Diafine in my stateroom; an excellent developer for the circumstances where time and temperature were tough to control. Shot at an EI of 1600, I got excellent shadow detail and great tonality.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •