melvin_bressler Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I asked this before, but got a minimal response. Has anyone been using 'new' Tri X. If so, how does it compare to 'old' Tri X, and what developer, time temp. do you use. I noticed that 'new' Tri X is about 40% more than the older stuff, and its all 24 exp. I have one roll of the old stuff, and I have to make a decision. Thanks for your input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Rowlett Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 One thing I noticed is that it sure has a heavy curl about it, so much so that it's sometimes impossible to position it in the film holder of my Minolta scanner. Backups? We don’t need no stinking ba #.’ _ , J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_phelan Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I have shot approx. 30 rolls of new TX. I cannot see any visual differences between new and old. I rate mine at EI 320 in an M6 body. I use D76 1:1, and recommend using Kodak's time & temp as a starting point (tho my guess is you will eventually be happy at 10-15% less time). I develop mine in a Jobo processor, so my info is pretty far off Kodak's. If you're interested, I develop at 75~F, with a 3' presoak, and 5' development time, all at Jobo rotation speed 3. I agree with Tony about the neg curling. It is important to use a hon-hardening fixer to help with this (I use Kodak Rapid Fix w/o the hardener), but it still curls a lot. Overall I love TX. I have no problem with the new factory and all the internet rumors about it. Given today's economic climate, I'm just glad they are still making it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy m. Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Hi Melvin, I have made good contrasty negatives using the new emulsion with HC-110 (dil-B) for 6 minutes with agitation every 30 sec first mimute, then once a minute (at 20 degrees). I know this is longer than suggested. The negatives look the same as they used to to me. So, overall, it seems okay, but I have moved over to HP5 with DDX now. Less grainy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdavids Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Melvin, What do you mean by "its all 24 exp"? B&H sells the new in the same 36 exposure rolls as the old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_schmid Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 New one is as good as old one, I don't get any curving. I develop them also in the same way. (ISO 400, D 76, 1:1, 11 min). Maybe there are differences with other developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
absinthe Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Mine curl fiercely if I fix for too long. Right now my workflo is: D76@68 degrees for 9.45 minuites while agitating first 30 sec then agitate for 5 sec every 30 sec; Stop bath 30 sec; fix 5 minutes; wash 5 minutes; hypo 2 minutes; wash 5 minutes & then photo-flo I am new to this. My film still curls, but I think its correlated to fixing time (one time I got distracted & fixed for 8 minutes & the curl was aweful) One time I used some Ilford developer (don't remember exact name) and the film did't seem to curl up nearly as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 i think theres more silver in the older stuff.....the negs just seem to be a bit richer in tone somehow.....theres more grain in the new stuff too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dean_williams Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I have shot six rolls of the new stuff (that's six 100 foot rolls), and I can find no difference what-so-ever in the look of the stuff. I use the same dev times, chemicals and EI as for the old stuff. Physically, the emulsion seems to be sturdier, less chance of scratching when wet. Never had a problem with curling, old or new style. Price for a long roll is $24 at B&H or Adorama. Was $23 two years ago, but I would think that's just inflation at work, not Kodak. All of the normal packaging quantities were still available (24, 36, 100 ft, 50 packs etc) last time I ordered. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melvin_bressler Posted March 11, 2004 Author Share Posted March 11, 2004 I live about 10 miles from Kodak Park. I guess the supply line is clogged, because the local stores carry only 24 exp. Tri x, at prices from $4.19 to $4.59 per roll no multi packs. I haven't yet seen 36 exp. Previously, I used to pay about $2.79 - 2.99 per roll, also 24 exp. I asked the question because there was a few articles about new tri x raving about it. Thanks to everyone for their input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maria_s. Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 I agree with Tony on curling of the negatives -- it's a problem when while scanning(I fill my bathtab with hot water to make a bathroom steamy and prevent curling but it still does; the radiators spitting hot air don't help either). Otherwise, I luv my Tri-X -- I developed few rolls in T-Max developer and grain was so smoooooth I couldn't find it with my grain focuser. I also use it with Diafine and it's just fantastic (better than pushed in D-76). What's the story with 24 frame roll? I always buy 36. Tri-X forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now