Tri-X or HP5?

[Eric Biggerstaff]

This is a good thread.

Like many, I have used HP5+ for a long time and find it to be an excellent film. I do not find it similar in many ways to Tri-X, but that is OK for me. I was just testing HP5+ today with Rodinal 1+50 and found my EI to be 640, which is exactly the same as when I develop it in DDX. I use a Jobo Expert drum on a Beseler motor base and I think the agitation causes the film speed increase. But even at 640, I find the film to be excellent.

As far as the "modern" films go, T-Max is a fine film but not for me. I am just not precise enough with my development tempretures to get it right. Sexton does but as Steve pointed out, he is usuallly photographing in shadows or low light and he has it dialed in. I do use a lot of Delta 100 which I rate at 200. I find it to be a great film and DDX is a wonderful developer with it. I don't think it is quite as difficult to process for a clod like me as compared to T-Max.

But, if you are really looking to change I would go ahead and experiment with a few films you are interested it. Test them, work out the kinks, get to know them a little and that way you will have options as opposed to being locked into one film. It may cost you a few dollars more to do this, but in the end it might be worth the extra time and money just to see which ones you really like.

Good luck.

[MIke Sherck]

If you are going to shoot either of the T-Max films you should have them mechanically processed They are very sensitive to any variation in time, temp, and agitation. This hair trigger response makes them impossible to consistently hand develop and is beyond anything that is needed to make zone system adjustments.

I'm not trying to start a flame war (honest!) but I've heard this before and have never understood it. I started LF shooting HP5+ and, while it's a nice film, I greatly prefer the T-max films for the landscape work I do most often. I simply have never had a problem controlling TMX or TMY's contrast and tonality during tray development in D-76 (straight and fresh.) Others I shoot with have similar experiences; in fact, comments such as yours have become a running joke between us as we simply can't imagine what the problem is. Yes, T-max films are sensitive to processing variations (age of developer being extremely important,) but they are far from being unmanagable. They just take practice and care.

I would bet that much of the useage of the T-Max films is from people who have moved up from smaller formats in the last 10 years who got sidetracked by the felt need for fine grain.steve simmons

Actually, I moved from PX and TX in 35m and medium format to TMX and TMY in 4x5; not because of the grain but because that's what the local stores carried in large format films. I've tried other films in 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 and I prefer pretty much everything about the T-max films: grain, tonality, sharpness, reciprocity, etc. I don't know that the old Plus-X can be bettered for portraits but as for older films, I got into the game too late to have used them. I never worried too much about that as I've always been told that the photographer was more important than the equipment, anyway.
mjs

[Ted Harris]

Personal preference and developer/film combinations play a large role in what film you use. Some may see/get results from a film that others never do. Having said that, I have tried FP-4 and HP-5 numerous times over the years in rolls, 4x5 and 5x7. Invariably I find I like the results less than I like the results from either Kodak, EFKE/Adox or (RIP) Agfa films. Mostly it is a question of tonal range.

Over time I have developed a strong preference for Adox/EFKE ISO 25 film for many applications but beyond that, today, I stay with Tri-X in 5x7 and ACROS in 4x5.

With respect to J&C I am a customer but I do recall that there have been a number of problems with their house brand film over the past year with regard especially to diminsions. I also recall reading in several other threads that some of their house brand fim was "seconds" from one of their other suppliers, perhaps John could chime in and add something to that. Many ot the films J&C sells have been around for decades and have always been less expensive than the films from Kodak, Ilford or Fuji. Largely a question of point of origin I assume since they are manufactured in Central or Eastern Europe with lower labor costs and, when part of the Soviet Bloc, sometimes lower quality control but that is changing today. Again, you need to choose to suit your needs. I first discovered Adox KB14 at Freestyle some 35 years ago and have been using it since.

[optV]

Its ironic that Sexton is mentioned in this thread. It my opinion that he is one of the best technical photographers so far in my generation (im a young squirt of 23).

As previously mentioned, I've never had a problem controlling my delta's consistancy, in fact, I far prefer hand development (roller) over my Jobo CPE2 (at least for 120). I am purchasing a used ATL-2 for 4x5, for now its a 3010 expert drum and a roller.

I can understand sticking with what you know if you've used it for years (eg. tri-X pan, hp5) but I'm wondering how many classic emulsion photographers have genuinely tried to develop a system with a newer T-grain film. These days, people tend to read something and follow the rest. There's a ton of bad advise out there, from "experts" and novices. My guess is that even some of the people responding in this thread haven't tried all the films mentioned. My advise is to try different films and see what you like.

I can honestly say that I have not tried tri-X in 4x5 but do plan to. Partially because I haven't established a system (personal IE), etc with 4x5 film yet, partially because I hope to discover something beautiful. For me, one of the biggest thrills of photography is trying something new.

My delta 100 results with 4x5 have been pleasing and consistant so far.

[Kevin Crisp]

TMAX 100 isn't my favorite film in sheet sizes but I do sometimes use it when I have a need for Readyloads. This year I took many rolls of TMAX 100 on a long trip, so most of my experience with this emulsion is recent. I appreciate the fact that TMAX 100 is more sensitive than some other films -- an extra minute, for example, can give a plus 1, at least in my darkroom. I just can't agree that processing it by hand (in tanks with manual agitation, in trays, following the Kodak recommendation on their web site for constant gentle tray agitation) is insanely difficult or precise or beyond the reach of a reasonably careful darkroom worker. Yes, you need to use an accurate thermometer. Yes, you need to agitate the film the same way each time. Yes, you need to keep track of the time and not stop development too soon or too late. Pretty basic stuff, really, and good suggestions for processing any film. I disliked the film early on but then that was developing it in HC110, as opposed to diluted D76 and Xtol which I now use. Now if you want to complain that you don't like the TMAX 100 look, I can understand that as a point of view, even though I don't entirely agree with it. The extra fixing and washing it requires is sometimes a little annoying. I just don't think it is fair to write the material off as fickle. Treat it consistently and it won't surprise you. And no, I have no good explanation for why this is tacked on to a Tri-x vs. Ilford thread.

[David Karp]

Ben,

I think that Bruce Barnbaum used (uses) the same times in HC110 for Tri-X and HP5+. That might have come from his book.

I like HP5+ a lot. I can't explain it. I just like the way my photos look. If HP5+ disappeared, I would probably use Tri-X. It is not the same, but it is good. I also like Pepsi, but would also drink Coke and be satisfied. Its the same sort of thing. No matter how we rationalize it, its just personal preference. As you have already mentioned, you just have to try it to see how you like it.

[sanking]

With respect to J&C I am a customer but I do recall that there have been a number of problems with their house brand film over the past year with regard especially to diminsions. I also recall reading in several other threads that some of their house brand fim was "seconds" from one of their other suppliers, perhaps John could chime in and add something to that.

So far as I know JandC resolved the specific dimension issue in question with all of their customers, which as I recall involved only one, or possibly two, emulsions. And there are a lot of very satisfied customers of Jand C out there. There is a current thread on APUG to this effect. See http://www.apug.org/forums/showthrea...022#post364022

As for the JandC 400 film that was earlier suggested as an alternative to TRI-X and HP5+, I have used it and found it to be a very nice film. I like TRI-X 320 more, but no one I know is selling TRI-X in ULF formats. Between HP5+ and JandC 400, I give HP5+ a slight advantage because of keeping issues, but for the price JandC 400 is a much better value. Just don't plan to hold on to it too long, as it develops B+F faster than TRI-X 320 and HP5+. However, the fresh stuff is every bit as good as HP5+, IMHO.

My own dealings with JandC have been excellent and I highly recommend the company. It is important to note that over the past three or four years JandC has been the *only* reliable source of film in ULF formats. Many times I picked up the phone and called places around the US looking for TRI-X or HP5+ in 7X17 or 12X20 size and none was avaiable, in contrast to the supply of JandC 400 which has been consistently available during the same time period. And more recently, JandC, along with Michael Kadillak, made the big TMY deal a success. Given Kodak's lack of committment to the ULF market in the past this was probably a one shot deal and I don't give them much credit. But I do give JandC credit as a reliable source of ULF film over the past several years, when almost no one could deliver.

Sandy King

[Don Hutton]

I'm starting to shoot 8x10 more these days, but my favorite film, Tri-X, is only available in that format in 50-sheet boxes, which is out of my budget.

Ben

If Tri-X 50 sheets boxes are not in your budget, then Tri-X is clearly not a choice for you, regardless of what certain people have suggested here. You really need something else which is - it's very tough to beat the J&C400 for the price. J&C are an excellent outfit to deal with too and often run specials on there house brands.