@dave lackey, thank you for your kind words! I'm happy to share my photos here and I'm glad you enjoy them.
@Erik van Straten, much appreciated! Based on the serial number link that @Freakscene posted, my Nikkor-H Auto 50mm f/2 non-AI is from around 1968-1971, just a few years younger than your lens. Seems Nikon had a prolific production output in that three year period, producing 198,897 lenses in that batch!
Love the tones, Erik, …👍👍👍gelatin silver print (nikkor h auto 50mm f2) nikkormat ftn
London 1974
Erik.
TriX, developed in D76. Split-grade printed on Ilford MGFB 17,8 x 24cm (7 x 9 1/2 in) glossy with a Leitz Focomat IIc, dried with an original 50 x 65cm one-sided Büscher.
Yeah, thanks, I was thinking that was TriX and D76. 😇 It’s been awhile since I used TriX and developed my own and I’m sure I will be back with it again. Soon.
Yes, in those years the TriX was relatively finely grained. After the Tmax400 was introduced, TriX became granier, presumely because there was less silver in it. Difficult to say, however. What do we know. The lightmeter of the Nikkormat is very good. A good exposed negative has a finer grain than a thin negative. I exposed the film for 200 ASA because a slightly more opaque negative is easier to print. I still do that nowadays with Tmax400.
I’m confused. Based on experience and the usual forum lore, I always thought Tri-X of the 1960’s and 1970’s had fairly noticeable grain and that was part of its appeal. Then, much later (1990’s?), Tri-X became more fine grained - at least for the same relative exposure and development.
Erik, it has been a long time since I last used TriX. What is your opinion of it these days? I am probably going to be using it a lot later this year in my Nikkormats and my FM2n.
