arthur_gottschalk Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 My problem with Tmax is that the fine grain makes it difficult for me to see with my grain focuseer in the darkroom. Just printed a batch of 16x20 landscapes shot with Tri-X, and I must say they are beautiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Helmke Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 I always say if I am stranded on a deserted island I want an F2, a 28mm and 100 rolls of Tri-X. The T Max films were intended, I think, to reduce the grain and so on and they did this well. For me though, it loses something. The grain, which I often want for one reason or another. Rick H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen_h Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 I am not sure why this is back, but I won't complain. Seems to me that there are at least two, maybe three, different films that are TMY. They have different names, and different development times. Tri-X has changed over the years, but maybe not quite as much. I used to do pretty much all film in Diafine, but now have some HC-110 and XTOL, too. Tri-X has a recommended EI of 1200 or 1600 in Diafine, where TMY has EI of about 500 or 640. -- glen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 I've shot a lot of Tri-x over the years but recent experimentation with TMY has me leaning toward the later. Beautiful tones, fine grain and it dry flat. I think the Tmax films were considered non traditional to the point of heresy for a few. Seems some have never gotten over that IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_hutcherson Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 Seems to me that there are at least two, maybe three, different films that are TMY. They have different names, and different development times. Tri-X has changed over the years, but maybe not quite as much. Of course, there are also two different Tri-Xs, and they are actually quite different films. The ASA speeds aren't even the same! Unfortunately, now one of them is only available in sheet film while the other is only available in roll film. At one time, TXP 320 was available in 220, and going back a bit further it was available in 120 also. TX 400 hasn't been available in sheet film since sometime in the late 80s or early 90s as best as I can tell, although now of course it is ubiquitous in 35mm and 120. 10 years ago, when TXP 320 was still available in 220, I don't think you could get TX 400 in 220. Despite being a somewhat newer emulsion than TX 400, TXP 320 has a lot of "old" properties. Not the least of these is that it comes with a "tooth" already applied to the base side so it can be manually retouched for anyone who still practices that mostly lost art. I suppose that also makes it better suited to sheet film-even 6x6 is uncomfortably small for me for getting a mole off a portrait. One of these days I'll get brave and try some manual retouching. although I'd love to go all out and get a retouching station. Also, even though I said it was a "newer" emulsion, I'm not sure it got the "finer grain" touch that TX got in ~2008(although that's mostly comparing expired 220 to fresh 120, and I don't really care about grain in 4x5). As a nice side effect of the backing on TXP, though, you can actually scan it between two sheets of regular glass without worrying about Newton's rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conrad_hoffman Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 Admittedly I haven't shot any film in a few years, but never warmed up to TMY. It has a certain signature tonal quality I can usually spot a mile away. Back when the earth was young and the T-grained films were introduced, Kodak put out a brochure with a lot of incredibly nice photos. They had tonal quality like crazy. Richness in the shadows and delicate not overblown highlights. Not all studio stuff either. I never got results like those, nor did anybody else I knew, even after a lot of fine tuning of exposure and development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_appleyard Posted May 15, 2018 Share Posted May 15, 2018 Admittedly I haven't shot any film in a few years, but never warmed up to TMY. It has a certain signature tonal quality I can usually spot a mile away. Back when the earth was young and the T-grained films were introduced, Kodak put out a brochure with a lot of incredibly nice photos. They had tonal quality like crazy. Richness in the shadows and delicate not overblown highlights. Not all studio stuff either. I never got results like those, nor did anybody else I knew, even after a lot of fine tuning of exposure and development. Same here. I went to trad grained films. 1 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