Matthew Allen
Well-known
Hi Matthew,
I use to order bw film from Fotoimpex (Tri-X 3.5 €) or from Monochrom (Trix-X 10 pack 36.50 €) both in german. Both ship fast.
Regards,
Joao
Thanks Joao.🙂
Matthew
Hi Matthew,
I use to order bw film from Fotoimpex (Tri-X 3.5 €) or from Monochrom (Trix-X 10 pack 36.50 €) both in german. Both ship fast.
Regards,
Joao
This is getting to sound like the Pepsi-Coke challenge.
I just shot my first roll of HP5 and find it "creamier" than Tri-X (both developed in D-76), giving it more "vintage" look. Tri-X looks grittier. I will use either depending on the look I'm going after.
forget the Kodak and Ilford stuff, buy Fuji Acros
Hmm, by this standard, according to Adorama, Tri-X ($4.49) is 87% "better" than HP5+ ($3.95) (or only 12%, depending on your Mathematical point of view)
Also, Windoze XP Professional upgrade ($149.00) is 14900% better than Red Hat Fedora (free). 😉
BTW check out 7dayshop.com for cheaper prices.
--
Monz
IMO both are goo[d] films. I prefer TriX overall and can find Hp5 a bit of a struggle in overcast conditions. IMO it is better suited to brighter light and then developed gently.
I like HP5 with really contrasty conditions, and Tri-X in cloudy/bright conditions. I use either HC110, or D76 depending on what I want or conditions.
I agree -- if you can shoot at ASA 100, the Fuji Acros is absolutely amazing stuff. Check the Acros flickr group
...
Then again, I've never seen why anyone bothers with Fuji mono. Great color slides: indifferent-to-poor B+W.
This doesn't mean that I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa. It's just a very good argument against relying too much on another's opinion.
Cheers,
R.