Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: New Tri-X

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,599

    New Tri-X

    I just got back from the local camera store with a box of the new emulsion TriX in 4x5. As Desi Arnaz would say: "Is too 'spensive, Loocy!" Maybe I'm spoiled by Freestyle, Photo Warehouse and J and C but a 100% more is a lot of money, even allowing for the cost of doing business with a local retailer. What I want to report however, is that the new emulsion is available in 4x5 and (conga drum roll, please) 25, count 'em twenty five sheet boxes!

    Now to see how it does in HC-110!

    Cheers!
    "I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    538

    New Tri-X

    After you finish development, "You have some 'splaining to do".

  3. #3
    tim atherton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1998
    Posts
    3,697

    New Tri-X

    100% more than...? The old Tri-X?
    You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn

    www.photo-muse.blogspot.com blog

  4. #4

    New Tri-X

    Not to be rude or anything, but why did you buy it if it costs too much?

  5. #5
    Moderator Ralph Barker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Posts
    5,034

    New Tri-X

    You're a real trooper, John. Buying the new Tri-X just to test it for those stil buying Kodak film, even though it's too 'spensive. ;-)

    Have you thought of doing a notch-to-notch comparison to HP5+?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,599

    New Tri-X

    Why did I buy it? Because expensive 4x5 film is cheaper than expensive 8x10 film and if it is not to my liking, at least I'll only have whats left of 25 sheets of the stuff instead of 50(besides, shooting 8x10 has numbed me into buck a sheet film). As to a comparison between the new tri-x and HP-5+(actually I've only got the Freestyle version in 5x7 on hand) any recommendations as to what testing proceedures I should use? Targets of varied contrasts maybe? My Agfa has both 5x7 and 4x5 backs, so I could use both emulsions with the same lens. Keep in mind my "lab" is my 5 year old daughter's Barbie-esque bathroom and most of my gear older than W.C. Handy's composition "Beale Street Blues."
    "I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,599

    New Tri-X

    Sorry for the vagueness. I paid 26.15+tax retail at a local store for 25 sheets of the new Tri-X. Thats slightly twice as much as 400 ISO film costs from Freestyle, Photo Warehouse, and maybe J and C too. I don't remember what 4x5 Tri-X was the last time I looked. I think the last 8x10 box of Tri-X I bought was around $140 for 50 sheets from B and H.-----Cheers!
    "I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    28

    New Tri-X

    re: "my "lab" is my 5 year old daughter's Barbie-esque bathroom"

    Are you not aware of the toxicity of some of these chemicals? And children are often even more sensitive than adults.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,599

    New Tri-X

    Mark,

    FWIW, I don't store or mix chemicals in Barbie-land but load/unload holders and the unicolor drums. The only chemicals I take in there are for developing prints and Barbie-land gets a thorough scrubbing after.
    "I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White

  10. #10
    Moderator Ralph Barker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Posts
    5,034

    New Tri-X

    What I've found helpful for me in the past, John, is to shoot a range of things that are typical for my work/style, but keep as much of the comparitive testing procedure the same for each of the films as possible or practical - same lens, film size, filters, composition, etc. That way, direct comparisons between how each film handles elements within that particular scene can be made. I've tried to keep the variations limited to exposure, as required by any speed difference, and development time, but using the same developer.

    That simple approach leaves some testing-procedure holes, however. Developer "X" might not be optimal for both films, for example. But, it's a quick and easy way to examine the characteristics of the films being tested so an assessment can be made as to which is preferred. Or better, which is preferred for certain types of images or circumstances.

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
  •