Question;
I just orderer 30 sheets of TRIX320 from B&H for $240 without shipping. I now see that I could have gotten 50 sheets of Ilford HP5+ for less than that........Is TRIX that much better??
Neil
Question;
I just orderer 30 sheets of TRIX320 from B&H for $240 without shipping. I now see that I could have gotten 50 sheets of Ilford HP5+ for less than that........Is TRIX that much better??
Neil
Come and see what I have done up and until now at www.neilsphotography.co.uk
Not to me
I love HP5+. It's not a duplicate of Tri-X. You would have to try it out.
I've used Tri-X for some 30 odd years. Lately, I've been shooting HP5 largely due to availability and cost. Don't have a real good feel for it yet!
I use both, but I love TXP.
I worked as an industrial/technical photographer for Eastman Kodak (and its successor ITT Space Systems) for 25 years. While I used many Kodak films during that time, my choice for my personal LF work was always Tri-X Pan Professional 4164. It worked quite well for me. Several years ago I decided to try Ilford FP4+. The speed difference doesn't matter to me, and I really like the quality of the prints I'm making now. I was loyal to my home town and my employer from 1982-2013, but that's long enough. Tri-X is a fine film; since you've ordered it, use it and stick with it for at least a year. That way you'll understand how it works. Then if you can imagine an improvement, try a different film and use that for a year. There ain't no 'magic bullet'!
No!
I've been using HP5+ in all formats (35mm through 4x5) for a very long time (starting without the "+") and it is my favorite. It also seems appropriate to support Ilford, since they are now the major supporter of black and white photography, via film, papers, and chemistry.
Bookmarks