Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I wish I had a few freezers full of HP4 in various sizes. 😀
TRI-X vs HP5
- Thread starter thawkins
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 31
- Views 9K
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Everyone is going to have their own opinion on this eternal question. I prefer Tri-X at 250 w/ a yellow filter. It's not as grainy as HP5, at least not in 35mm. Looks good in lots of developers, the best might be D76. Not the sharpest developer/film combination, but the tones are luscious.
I agree, it doesn't look like it used to, but then I don't either :] It still looks really, really good. Figuring out how you like it is the thing, and it is super flexible and forgiving. As mentioned, the Delta is a more modern film, like T-Max. Not at all like the other two films. Delta 100 is almost grain free.
What I like about Tri-X and D76 is the tonal range and beautiful grain. Canon R 100 2 on an F1. Tri-X full strength in D76.
Very nice photo !
That particular film and developer combo are a match made in heaven.
Krefey
Newbie
To fight the curl
To fight the curl
Hey guys.
I like both, HP5 and Tri-X, but used HP5 for ages because of the curl. Many others here commented on this, too.
I have started to use Tri-X again, because curl is not an issue for me any longer. I have built a little film dryer that now allows me to dry any 135 and 120 film without any curl.
You need a pipe that is wide enough to hold you film reels with caps on both ends. Make a hole in both caps, put fine particle filter over the openings and a computer fan at each side. Now you have a dust free compartment in which the air is constantly exchanged, thereby taking all humiditiy out regularly. In this pipe you can dry the film on the reel.
The benefit regarding the curl: As the film is slightly bended lengthwise, it cannot curl while it dries. If you take it from the reel after it is bone dry, there of corse is a slight bend lengthwise, but that is no problem for scanning at all. The film holder of any scanner will hold this straight.
And if you put it into sleeves, the weight of the sleeve is almost enough to straighten it our.
Tri-X is absolutely no problem if you dry it on the reel. In the pipe in a normaly heated living room it dries in maybe 8 hours.
Regards
Thorsten
___________
Edit: I forgot to mention that dying on the reel does not work well, if there is a lot of water on the film. The big drops of water need to come off befory you put it in the dryer. So I got myself a big salad tosser. Put the film reel in there, put an empty reel on the opposite side as counter weight and spin it for a minute or two, after that the film will not be wet anymore but only moist and will dry well in the reel. I did that by the way always, also if I want to hang the film in my shower to dry. It speed up drying incredibly, if you get rid of the big drops of water, before you dry.
To fight the curl
Hey guys.
I like both, HP5 and Tri-X, but used HP5 for ages because of the curl. Many others here commented on this, too.
I have started to use Tri-X again, because curl is not an issue for me any longer. I have built a little film dryer that now allows me to dry any 135 and 120 film without any curl.
You need a pipe that is wide enough to hold you film reels with caps on both ends. Make a hole in both caps, put fine particle filter over the openings and a computer fan at each side. Now you have a dust free compartment in which the air is constantly exchanged, thereby taking all humiditiy out regularly. In this pipe you can dry the film on the reel.
The benefit regarding the curl: As the film is slightly bended lengthwise, it cannot curl while it dries. If you take it from the reel after it is bone dry, there of corse is a slight bend lengthwise, but that is no problem for scanning at all. The film holder of any scanner will hold this straight.
And if you put it into sleeves, the weight of the sleeve is almost enough to straighten it our.
Tri-X is absolutely no problem if you dry it on the reel. In the pipe in a normaly heated living room it dries in maybe 8 hours.
Regards
Thorsten
___________
Edit: I forgot to mention that dying on the reel does not work well, if there is a lot of water on the film. The big drops of water need to come off befory you put it in the dryer. So I got myself a big salad tosser. Put the film reel in there, put an empty reel on the opposite side as counter weight and spin it for a minute or two, after that the film will not be wet anymore but only moist and will dry well in the reel. I did that by the way always, also if I want to hang the film in my shower to dry. It speed up drying incredibly, if you get rid of the big drops of water, before you dry.
lxmike
M2 fan.
Always been a huge fan of HP5 ever since my teenage years in the 1970's
dtcls100
Well-known
Very cool. Never thought of drying film on the reel.
presspass
filmshooter
Over the past 40 years I've used HP5, HP5+, and the various iterations of Tri-X. When we used film at work, it was 10 to 12 rolls a week, all 35. Now we shoot digital at work, but I still do film for my own projects, so it's down to two to four rolls a week. For the past several years, I've been using D-23 as a developer. Both films work well in that, the contrast is controlled, and they wet print and scan well. Typically, I get the one that's the least expensive at the time. Until a year ago, that was 50 packs of HP5+. Right now, I'm shooting Kentmere and am satisfied with that. Which film doesn't matter as much as your willingness to learn how to shoot and develop it.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
Thorsten, Great post regarding your solution for film curl, thank you. And welcome!
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Practical difference. HP5+ doesn't curl this bad. HP5+ doesn't need extra fixing time. And it is not spitting punk into fixer. HP5+ costs less.
I'm using HP5+ @1600 regularly and @3200 now, @3200 it is next to superior comparing to Delta 3200.
Watch my posts with prints, I'll have new ones printed from HP5+ @3200. 🙂
No practical difference. TRI-X looks like classic grain film.
Print from HP5+ @1200 negative on contrast grade 1 paper:
HP5+ @1200 on contrast grade 3 paper:
I'm using HP5+ @1600 regularly and @3200 now, @3200 it is next to superior comparing to Delta 3200.
Watch my posts with prints, I'll have new ones printed from HP5+ @3200. 🙂
No practical difference. TRI-X looks like classic grain film.
Print from HP5+ @1200 negative on contrast grade 1 paper:
HP5+ @1200 on contrast grade 3 paper:
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Dryers similar to the one you built used to be manufactured. My high school had one. The air from it came from a device mounted on the top that looked like a handheld hair dryer, and it worked like one, too. The air was heated and blew very hard. Dried film VERY fast. I never used it; the filters on it were ancient and had not been changed in decades! Yours, with the gentle, non-heated airflow, seems safer to me.
Hey guys.
I like both, HP5 and Tri-X, but used HP5 for ages because of the curl. Many others here commented on this, too.
I have started to use Tri-X again, because curl is not an issue for me any longer. I have built a little film dryer that now allows me to dry any 135 and 120 film without any curl.
You need a pipe that is wide enough to hold you film reels with caps on both ends. Make a hole in both caps, put fine particle filter over the openings and a computer fan at each side. Now you have a dust free compartment in which the air is constantly exchanged, thereby taking all humiditiy out regularly. In this pipe you can dry the film on the reel.
The benefit regarding the curl: As the film is slightly bended lengthwise, it cannot curl while it dries. If you take it from the reel after it is bone dry, there of corse is a slight bend lengthwise, but that is no problem for scanning at all. The film holder of any scanner will hold this straight.
And if you put it into sleeves, the weight of the sleeve is almost enough to straighten it our.
Tri-X is absolutely no problem if you dry it on the reel. In the pipe in a normaly heated living room it dries in maybe 8 hours.
Regards
Thorsten
___________
Edit: I forgot to mention that dying on the reel does not work well, if there is a lot of water on the film. The big drops of water need to come off befory you put it in the dryer. So I got myself a big salad tosser. Put the film reel in there, put an empty reel on the opposite side as counter weight and spin it for a minute or two, after that the film will not be wet anymore but only moist and will dry well in the reel. I did that by the way always, also if I want to hang the film in my shower to dry. It speed up drying incredibly, if you get rid of the big drops of water, before you dry.
Krefey
Newbie
Yes, I never had any problem. And as it is a simple, generic fine particle filter, it is easy to replace it. I bought aroud a square meter for next to nothing on Amazon and cut a few square centimeters to use.
Ever few months a new filter is no big issue. A heating would be nice though. Nothing rough, maybe 30°C or so, would be sufficient.
The more films you put in, the longer it takes, a single roll of 135 film took maybe 4 hours, but if you put in 3 or 4 rolls of 120, it will take longer. I don't care, though. I put it in in the evening, go to work the next day and when I come home it is dry no matter how much I put in there.
rolfe
Well-known
Glad this thread seems to have been resurrected 🙂.
I seem to be the only one not having curling problems with Tri-X, but I'm not sure what I'm doing that is any different from anyone else. I process in a Jobo ATL-1000, dunk in Photoflo and dry hanging in an Arkay forced hot air dryer. Tri-X dries in under 10 minutes with no curl.
As far as the original premise of differences between HP5+ an Tri-X, if I'm wet printing, I can barely tell the difference. HP5+ may have slightly punchier mid-grays, but I'm sure those could be equalized by tinkering with processing. Scanning however, HP5+ is much grainier for me than Tri-X.
Rolfe
I seem to be the only one not having curling problems with Tri-X, but I'm not sure what I'm doing that is any different from anyone else. I process in a Jobo ATL-1000, dunk in Photoflo and dry hanging in an Arkay forced hot air dryer. Tri-X dries in under 10 minutes with no curl.
As far as the original premise of differences between HP5+ an Tri-X, if I'm wet printing, I can barely tell the difference. HP5+ may have slightly punchier mid-grays, but I'm sure those could be equalized by tinkering with processing. Scanning however, HP5+ is much grainier for me than Tri-X.
Rolfe
Peter Jennings
Well-known
Although I have been using HP5 lately and like it, I did figure out how to dry Tr-X flat. After hanging to dry, I draw a folded paper towel down the side of the film opposite the grain. I then let the film dry normally (in a humid bathroom - where I do my processing). By letting the emulsion stay wet, that side of the film dries more slowly. My theory is that Tri-X emulsion dries quickly and the shrinking from this process pulls the film edges in and causes the film to cup. If the film base can dry before the emulsion, it can prevent the cup.
Similar threads
