My opinion on this is very simple. Use anything and everything you can get your hands on. Experiment. Find the look that really floats your boat. JandC also caries Efke films: an excellent older-style emulsion. Freestyle Photo carries Arista. Both are excellent and less expensive. Give Maco Aura a try if you dare. T-Max, Tri-X, FP4 and HP5 are all excellent films, but, thanks to the Internet, they aren't the only game in town.
--Gary
Since you're new and have no existing preferences, you might base your decision on which film you think will be around for another five or more years. Kodak has shown no commitment to b&w photography that I've noticed. With their recent termination of all b&w papers it doesn't seem like films can be far behind so if it were me I'd probably avoid Tri-X and T-Max. That leaves
Ilford plus the little companies (Efke, Berger, et al about which I know nothing). I don't know how long Ilford will be around but I think they're a better bet than Kodak, at least b&w is their only business and we know their excellent quality control. I also happen to like HP5+ so that would be my suggestion. On the other hand, if you adopt the theory that none of us can foresee the future I'd probably sugguest 100 T-Max because you can get it both in regular form and in Readyloads.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
I should say that I have read about the differences between the sheet and the 35mm types of Tri-X, mostly in thickness of the film base.
David, essentially all sheet films are coated on a thicker base than 35mm films. That's not an issue. What matters is that a picture taken with TXP will look very different from a picture taken with TX.
The comments about Kodak's lack of commitment are unfortunate. Yes, the did drop their black and white printing papers but they had really been out of the game for years. They still sell a lot of film and Tri-X (across all formats) is their best seller so it is silly to think it will go away. It is very good film in a variety of developers. FP4+ is also a very good film and with Ilford's commitment and survial based on traditional balck and white film I would trust this as well.
In large format fine grain/T-grain technology seems unnecessary. The T-Max films are fussy and can be hard to use (they are very senstivie to changes in time, temp, and agitiation) so I would suggest staying with a more traditional film. HP5+ is a good film if you need that much speed.
The important thing is not to join the film of the month club. Pick one and stay with it for awhile.
What will you be photographing?
steve simmons
I agree that T Max 100 is highly sensitive to very consistent agitation and temps but I have found T Max 400 to be a joy with its variability in the darkroom as it takes every soup I have tried with it from DDX to T Max RS or Pyrocat HD and ABC and it just sings. It has nothing at all to do with the "grain" or the lack of need to worry about this variable I find it is about the marvelous gradations in the middle of the film curve and the extra speed. I feel many have continued to dish T Max 400 speed assuming that it is as tempermental as T Max 400 and nothing could be further from the truth.
Just my $0.02.
Cheers!
For me, the convenience, light weight, compactness, and cleanliness of ReadyLoads overwhelms other considerations (even the price!). So I end up using T-Max for 4x5, even though I really prefer Tri-X, which I use for 5x7 and 8x10. Just another consideration to bear in mind.
APologize. I meant to say -
I feel many have continued to dish T Max 400 speed assuming that it is as tempermental as T Max 100 and nothing could be further from the truth.
Cheers!
Agree w/ Steve. Get to know one and stick with it.
Disagree w/ the concern about Tmax's 'fussiness'. If you can read a thermometer and a timer/watch you can develop TMax -- follow manufacturer's instructions and stay consistent. I am a beginner, having done LF for only 3 years, yet Tmax worked the very first time and has not dissapointed since.
Furthermore, you need to decide if you want to digitally scan or not. TMax 100 in XTOL is a good combo for scanning.
Jiri -- Yes it is indeed Fomapan 200 I was referring to, which they (Defender) claim is similar to Tri-X.
Steve -- From what I've read over the years, Tri-X exposed at 200-320 ASA and minimally developed in HC-110 is (or was) the classic LF film/developer combo. OK, that's easy -- I'll just do that (ha-ha)!
But this is not 1949, I'm not Ansel Adams, and Tri-X is not the same as it was, so even for him it wouldn't be possible to get the same results. So much for history.
Despite that, I seriously want to give Tri-X a go.
Ed -- that's a good question. I have heard that T-Max gives the best negatives for digital scanning. If so, I'd be bound to try it. A proper wet darkroom is still somewhere off in the future for me.
Thanks Joe.
Michael, thanks too.
Gary -- You're right, there's a lot of film types to choose from. Another lifetime to explore it all would be great(!) but I'll just have to pick one or two for now!
Brian, let's hope Kodak hangs in there awhile. But anyway, a couple of dozen boxes of 4x5 won't take up much room in the freezer!
Oren -- From what I've read the sheet 4x5 Tri-X has the thinner base. 35mm Tri-X is thicker, probably to withstand sprocket teeth pulling at the perforations(?)
Steve -- I hope you're right about Kodak keeping Tri-X around. I also don't see the sense in using a slow film in LF. I like to shoot trees and atmospheric landscapes (fog, etc.) in low light, so
200 ASA would be as slow as I'd want to go. I used to like the grain of Tri-X in 35mm, so in 4x5 it's not even an issue.
Thanks very much to you all for your helpful input!
David
Per Kodak, 35mm TX is coated on a 5-mil acetate base, TXP sheet film is coated on a 7-mil ESTAR (polyester) base.
Back to what really matters: the single most important piece of advice in this thread is what Steve Simmons said - pick one film and stay with it for a while.
Good luck!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks