kiev4a
Well-known
I have used Tri-X fil since it was introduced in the 1950s with grain the size of small pebbles. I have always liked Tri-x because if is forgiving and, when exposed and developed properly, can record small differences in the gray scale.
When I got back into black and white photography after a 25-year absence I naturally started shooting Tri-X and was relatively happy with the results. But when I picked up a used Mamiya C220 the store didn't have any 120 Tri-X on hand so I got a couple of rolls of Tmax. Shot it and got great results with seemingly less grain than Tri-X. The I got a roll of Tmax 100 in 35mm and shot some pictures in bright sunlight of our granddaughter. The tone range was impressive and so was the fine grain.
I have to admit I'm not one for photos with a lot of contrast. I learned to shoot at a newspaper where it was important to hold the "dot pattern" in a screened print so even whites had a little grey shading.
The photo of the locomotive was shot on 120 Tmax 400. The grandaughter photo was Tmax 100 35mm.
From now on I'll probably do most of my B&W work with Tmax.
When I got back into black and white photography after a 25-year absence I naturally started shooting Tri-X and was relatively happy with the results. But when I picked up a used Mamiya C220 the store didn't have any 120 Tri-X on hand so I got a couple of rolls of Tmax. Shot it and got great results with seemingly less grain than Tri-X. The I got a roll of Tmax 100 in 35mm and shot some pictures in bright sunlight of our granddaughter. The tone range was impressive and so was the fine grain.
I have to admit I'm not one for photos with a lot of contrast. I learned to shoot at a newspaper where it was important to hold the "dot pattern" in a screened print so even whites had a little grey shading.
The photo of the locomotive was shot on 120 Tmax 400. The grandaughter photo was Tmax 100 35mm.
From now on I'll probably do most of my B&W work with Tmax.
