For the Love Of Tri-X / Post your pictures

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M3, Summilux 50mm f/1.4 v2, TriX.

Erik.

 

[DwF]

Fabulous posts here!

 

[Cocal]

2016♠136 by ruggero ranzani, su Flickr
Leica M6, Voigtlander Nokton 40mm F1.4 classic. Kodak 400TX;Fomadon Excel (stock) 7' 20°C . Scan from negative film.

 

[helen.HH]

by Helen Hill, on Flickr

 

[brennanphotoguy]

Brian by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

GS-F by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

Awe by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

Work Bound by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

Happy Friday by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

Kayla by Brennan McKissick, on Flickr

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M3, Summicron 50mm f/2 rigid, TriX.

Erik.

 

[xayraa33]

1970s Tri X was grainier but somehow looked better in the final image than today's version, as it imparted its own special look on the print.

 

[Erik van Straten]

1970s Tri X was grainier but somehow looked better in the final image than today's version

Yes, I agree, it looks as if the old TriX had two layers, one for the light tones and the other for the dark ones. The TriX of today seems to be a single layer emulsion. I am not sure of it, but it seems to be so. The modern TriX is more graphical, less painterly, so to speak.

Erik.

 

[xayraa33]

Yes, I agree, it looks as if the old TriX had two layers, one for the light tones and the other for the dark ones. The TriX of today seems to be a single layer emulsion. I am not sure of it, but it seems to be so. The modern TriX is more graphical, less painterly, so to speak.

Erik.

I agree, there seemed to be a unique 3D kind of velvity luminosity, despite the obvious grain, especially noticeable from 35mm negative print enlargements obtained from 1970s Tri X.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M3, Summicron 50mm f/2 rigid, TriX.

Erik.

 

[TennesseJones]

Tri-X developed in Xtol, Wet Print, Pentax 67

 

[brennanphotoguy]

Erik, your work is always so good and consistent.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thank you, Brennan, I like your work very much!

Erik.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

1970s Tri X was grainier but somehow looked better in the final image than today's version, as it imparted its own special look on the print.

I'm sure this has been asked before, but what is available today, if anything, which looks like old Tri-X (taking processing into account)?

 

[Erik van Straten]

What is available today, if anything, which looks like old Tri-X?

400-2TMY (Tmax400), but with finer grain.

Erik.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

400-2TMY (Tmax400), but with finer grain.

Erik.

Thanks, Erik. I use a lot of Tmax400, processed several ways, so I will take that as a "No"

I do like the way you process Tmax400, however.

 

[xayraa33]

I'm sure this has been asked before, but what is available today, if anything, which looks like old Tri-X (taking processing into account)?

I found Fomapan 400 a bit similar to old Tri X in grain and look sometimes, except for the box speed, unpredictability in certain lighting situations (lacking proper anti-halation backing) and even in controlled development and of course quality control.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Thanks, have never tried Fomapan 400. Will go over to filmdev.org and see what I can find.
I know I should just settle on an emulsion or two, and get on with life, just can't seem to get there.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thanks, Erik. I use a lot of Tmax400, processed several ways, so I will take that as a "No"

I do like the way you process Tmax400, however.

Thank you. Larry.

Nikkormat FTn, Nikkor-H Auto 50mm f/2, TriX (D76, 1974).

Erik.

 

[Mackinaw]

I'm sure this has been asked before, but what is available today, if anything, which looks like old Tri-X (taking processing into account)?

Eastman 5222 Double-XX.

Jim B.