Which film has more silver FP4 or Tri-X?

[bradley_thomas]

Which film has more silver FP4 or Tri-X?

 

Thank you,

 

Brad

[john_shriver]

Doesn't matter one whit. "Silver rich film" is marketing nonsense. Neither company is going to tell you, it's proprietary information. The cost of silver is such a microscopic part of the cost of the film.

 

If you want to measure it yourself, you would need a very good analytical balance. Then cut squares of the films, two of each. Weigh them all. Now, develop and fix one of each type, and fix only the other one of each type. Now, weigh them all again. The differences in the weight changes of those going through each processing path is the weight of the silver. But, it's such a very small weight that it may be exceedingly hard to measure.

[lex_jenkins]

It's really a non-issue with contemporary film emulsions, Brad. Sensitizing dyes are used as well as silver, which accounts in part for the discolored liquids poured off during processing. (Anti-halation dyes are part of that as well.)

 

If you search the archives using "silver rich" as a search phrase you'll find many previous discussions. Other than a handful of emulsions, none of which are from Kodak or Ilford, the era of the "silver rich" emulsion is long past, if it ever was an issue to begin with.

[bruce_watson1]

What John said.

 

If you really want silver for some reason, your best bet is the thicker emulsion films. Like old Kodak Super-XX for example (hasn't been made in a decade or more), or similar current films from Eastern Europe. They'll exhibit more graininess (sometimes a lot more), they'll be less sharp, and they'll have long toes and considerably more problems with shouldering off in the highlights. But if that's what you want then that's what you want so go for it.

 

But more silver doesn't mean better. The best tonality, sharpest films today have the least silver. I'm talking about the Fuji Acros, Tmax, and Delta crowd. Excellent films all, but the latest version of 400Tmax is just outstanding. It's hard to believe that film can be this good.

[lake_photography]

this question received a lot of informational responses but no one actually seemed to answer the question posted. Or did i

miss something.

[jay_de_fehr]

William,

 

I don't think anyone here knows. Kodak doesn't publish the silver content of their films, and neither do any other manufacturers I know of. The absolute, or even relative amount of silver is meaningless out of the context of the emulsion formula, which I'm sure none of us knows, and few would be qualified to assess. I think what the above posters are trying to say in the nicest possible way is that the question is meaningless.

[lake_photography]

Hi Jay,

 

Did you mean to say the question was meaningless? Because I personally don't think any questions asking for knowledge

can be meaningless. If they thought the question was meaningless I wonder why not just say so instead of giving long

winded answers. After all, as you stated Kodak does have the answer or at least their part of the answer and therefor the

answer to the question does exist. What i read was the people who were responding just did not know the answer

themselves but couldn't seem to just say that. Or again, and this is very possible, I missed something.

 

Bill

[patrick_gainer]

I suggest you see if you get any more responsive answer from Kodak and/or Ilford. There are rules of thumb for silver content of images, but the silver content of an image has no precise correlation with how much silver is in an emulsion. If it did, then we could say that the two films in question have the same silver content.

 

If you are concerned with recovering silver from used film, there will be a correlation between image density and reclaimable silver, but it will depend on the shape of the silver halide crystal.

 

If Kodak or Ilford will not tell you the answer you seek, what makes you think either one would tell us?

[jay_jay12]

Bradley:

 

You didn't ask whether silver rich or silver poor film was better.

 

You asked which film has more silver. I don't know the answer to you question.

 

All I can provide you is with a link to Efke films which boast high silver content.

 

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=1000001711

 

There may be other film companies that boast a high silver content that I am not aware.

[rustys pics]

Brad, don't be put off by some of the answers. It all sounds a lot more harsh than the tone would be in conversation. I think you should shoot a roll of each film and see which one you like better.

Look at it this way; asking how much silver is in the film to determine quality is kind of like asking how much paint did DaVinci use on the Mona Lisa or Michaelangelo on the Sistine Chapel. Each artist would've said "I used enough!"

[iliafarniev]

Besides, emulsion on Tri-X as well as on FP4 in 135-36 format is not the same as, say on 4X5s. There are ways of exposing and developing which may get more silver contain in the resulting image. If these films are exposed and processed "normaly" most of the silver is gone into fixer. Only 5 - 7% or less of original content makes it into the image. Generaly speaking the thiker emulsion the greater silver content.

 

Tri-X has more silver.

[alan_rockwood]

It's interesting that so many responses to the original question make assumptions as to the motivations of the questioner. However, the questioner himself gives no information as to the reason he asked the question. The underlying reason may have had something to do with image quality, as many assume, but it may have been something else.

 

For example, I have often wondered about the silver content of films in order to get some idea of whether fluctuations in the price of silver might have a significant impact on the manufacturing cost of film. This has nothing to do with image quality.

 

Another reason to ask about the silver content of film is to make some kind of estimate of developer requirements of developing certain films.

 

I third reason might be simply intellectual curiosity (one of my favorites).

 

Of course, the questioner may have wondered about the image quality of high vs. low sliver content films, as many responders here seem to assume.

 

If anyone knows the real answer to the question I would also be interested in knowing it, for a variety of reasons. Anyone else care to give it a go?

[keith_tapscott]

Probably Tri-X due to it`s higher sensitivity to light. None of this really matters though, as film choice comes down to personal preference where the aesthetic `pictorial` look is concerned. Choose a film that suits your style of photography.

[lex_jenkins]

Film sensitivity isn't directly related to silver content. Sensitizing dyes are a major factor. Issues such as sensitivity and, especially, reciprocity are complicated by other differences in emulsions, such as the tabular grain of Kodak T-Max films and Ilford's epitaxial-growth technology in their Delta emulsions.

 

See this thread, among others:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00F2Rx

 

Nobody here wishes to stifle reasonable, informed discussion. But there's a lot of speculation based on lack of information and understanding whenever the issue of "silver content" arises.

 

Asking how much silver is in a film emulsion is pretty much like asking how much sensitizing or anti-halation dye is used, or how much polyester is in the film base. The answer depends on the relevance of the question, which depends on the reason for asking the question. All we can answer here is "enough to do the job." For more specifics you'd need to ask the film manufacturers or check the data on their websites (Kodak provides a bit more specific data than do most manufacturers).

[Alan Johnson]

The best provenance for silver rich film seems to be the Adox/Efke, 'No competitor has ever disputed Fotokemika's claim'.However, it is difficult to link silver rich with other qualities.

 

http://www.groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.darkroom/msg/6bea8b061896b835

[hank_skinner]

Brad;<p/>It sounds like you want to rob a train filled with film and then recover the silver. No, no, no! Rob the train for the diesel fuel, copper, iron/steel, and electronics. Much more profitable. <p/><p/>This is my facetious answer to a question that makes no sense to me. But keep in mind that I'm stewpid.

[carbon_dragon]

You need to design an experiment if you want the answer. Consider the following. Go buy some number of rolls of each -- not sure how many you need -- 10, 20, 50, 100, not sure. Then go buy some fixer, say Kodak rapid fix. Then mix up two solutions of the fixer and start shooting. Every roll, fix in the fixer. The more rolls you fix for each film in each of the separate fixer solutions, the more silver gets suspended in the solution. Maybe you only need a few rolls apiece.

 

Then after developing the same number of rolls reusing each fixer solution, weigh each one. My guess is that the heaviest used fixer is the one for the film that has the most silver.

 

What do you think?

[antonio_a.1]

FP4 has more than Tri-X.

 

 

;-)

[iliafarniev]

Being ironic is easy fun but also constitute bad communication.

 

More silver in emulsion gives more optical density in fully exposed parts. Simple test to answer original question will be to expose one frame of each film for daylight for some seconds making sure whole of the photosensitive material in film is activated. Process normally. Put these frames into enlarger and measure the light on the board for each. The one with least light is most dence and has more silver.

[big toys are better]

I will agree that if your only concern is more silver (which does give a bit more reliability in and control over

image contrast),

then the lower tech films such as Efke's will provide that extra bit of silver comfort. There is nothing wrong

with that unless you are looking for maximum accutance, then the thin layer films like the tabular grained films

(Kodak's TMax and Ilford's Delta), or perhaps Pan F for regular grained films, will have the edge.

[alan_rockwood]

Brad,

 

I think the very best thing for you to do is to join apug.org (if you haven't already) and post the same question at the emulsion making section. They are more likely to care about the answer to this particular question than most of the people here at photo.net and also more likely to have an answer for you.

 

This is not to say that there is anything wrong with photo.net, but just to say there is probably a better forum for your question at apug.

 

Alan

[jay_jay12]

I have a question for everyone:

 

If silver content doesn't matter (and I admit I don't know if it does or doesn't) then how come film companies advertise their film has a high silver content like Efke?

[iliafarniev]

Silver content does matter.

 

How film manufacturers such as Efke do come to advertise as they do ...? Hey.. we know better then that.

[jim_appleyard]

Does silver content matter? IDO, but when you click the shutter, x amount of light reaches the film. It can only expose x amount of silver. The rest is removed during the fix. Correct?

[lake_photography]

Antonio A. Good answer. Right to the point