Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
Replying to Alan, I shoot both TMY100 and TMX400. The faster version is obviously better for large format usage with its smaller f-stops, especially on windy days. But I shoot it in all formats from 35mm to 8x10, and process it in PMK pryro. The 100 speed product is ideal for Med Format usage which needs a higher degree of enlargement. But I have to resort to a different developer to get comparable edge effect. I keep quite a bit of TMX100 sheet film on hand for technical darkroom usage (masks, internegatives, color separation negs, etc), so some of that inevitably gets used for generally shooting too. I have to ration my 8X10 TMY400 sheets more circumspectly, because I have less of it, and it's getting expensive to replace.
Otherwise, is my memory getting off, and is this no longer the Large Format forum? How did "great photographs" via Diana cameras sneak into the discussion? Evidently, just another ludicrous Devil's Advocate ploy.
I have a 16 by something Diana - the type Carleton Watkins used I think.
In responding to the the many and building personal attacks made very directly to y thread I will reply
I have and continue to use TMax 400 and Tmax100 in 8x10 and 4x5.. I really like my FP4 in 8x10 and the HP5 in my 8x10 and 11x14. I have used hundreds of sheets. I have much in stock and at any one time have 20 8x10 holders filled with Ilford.
I am not the "lover of Tri X. I have used it occassionally. It is expensive. I am thrying to find out from tri x users what their experience is. Yet this inquiry which I am hoping would be focused has yeilder several prsonal attacks and disparaging remarks.
Basically there are photogs who are " In Love" with Tri x . I am not one of those. I had hoped there was a Tri X photog who would explain the attraction to Tri X.
Yet it seems there are not any Tri X photos responding.
The users of the Tmax have bee very protective and frankly Haughty in their views. Somewhat intolerant of the idea of the use of any other emulsion.
They should open their eyes and try the Ilford. Or dare I suggest ... ADOX !
Yes I really like Adox. it is for me the top emulsion. Maybe its the Climate up here north the 49th Parallel. The air is clear, Our society is based on Tolerance and Diversity. Exploring the vast geography and multlitude of cultures in Canada. In Toronto the courts recognize 47 languages and dialects.
Delighting in the culinary delights of Poutine and Maple Syrup on everything. Have you tried a bacon relish with a Maple Sugar base note? Then you have not lived.
Tri X is now on order. I will make my Own interpretation. In fact the wholesale barrage of disgust for Tri X has made it an Underdog. And We Canadians love Underdogs. Again that is our culture.
I know it will not disappoint, It ill be an adventure. Yielding Contact prints on Adox paper. Wet darkroom enlargement on Ilford Paper exposed under my Durst 184. Sloshed in Dektol. Such a sea of diversity and Wonder
Well I have to get to Breakfast. The sun is up and its a new day. Sunny and a high of 26 Centigrade is expected. Yes in Canada we measure in Celcius. It beed the Law for decades to emphasis the differences we have .
Regards
I have no opinion
The 11X14 10 boxes of 10 sealed sheets in OE box
Is for my DIY education
The price was right for me at that time
Telling me and OP we are wasting something
Is wrong
Do not Covet
I used X-Ray for years to learn
even as ridicule was mounting
Tin Can
Memory is close; very close! When Tri-X originally came out it was 200 ASA (daylight)/ 160 ASA (Tungsten), which was a high-speed film in those days. AS you probably know, the change to the film speed, from 200 to 400, was not a result of any changes to the film but change to how film speed was computed.
Bookmarks