Tri-X Prices - B&H

[jay bee]

I was looking at prices for 50 roll bricks of Tri-X at B&H and

noticed the considerable difference between USA - $212.50, USAW

(Grey) - $149.50 and Imported - $104.50. Is there a real difference

in film quality or should I opt for the lowest price? I'm not a pro

or anything but want to make sure that my images aren't given short

shrift. I've liked my results that I've gotten from the single rolls

I've purchased at my local photography store and want to standardize

on the film, hence the desire to purchase a large quantity.

 

Please let me know which I should opt for or concerns I should be be

wary of.

 

Thx

[jersey_emt]

I've used both USA and Imported Tri-X and they are the same film and give the same results. I say go with the Imported at half the cost.

[Robert_Lai]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh1.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=GetPage__Aindex_html___page=GreyMarketStatic.html___SID=F25E42BDAE0 is an explaination of the different designations by B&H. In your scenario, I would opt for the lowest price.

 

Have you considered bulk loading? Out of 100 feet of film, you will get at least 18 rolls of 36 exposure, as well as a roll of 24 (or so).

To get 50 rolls of 36 exposure film, you will need about 2.8 x 100 feet bulk rolls, or effectively, 300 feet. 300 feet of Tri-x at B&H costs $68.85. If you purchase a bulk film loader such as the Watson for $17.99 and 50 empty reloadable cassettes (15 cents each) for $7.50, the total cost for this endeavour works out to $94.34. This is less than even the lowest price you have stated above. The other benefit is that since the film will all have come from the same bulk rolls, you get very consistent result from one cartridge to the next. This is very important if you are developing and printing your own, and want to standardize developing conditions. Even if you aren't developing your own, you can customize your own shooting conditions with reliable consistency.

[david_goldfarb]

Unless you are participating in a Kodak pro marketing program where you get a certain number of points and some sort of reward for the amount of Kodak USA product you use, I'd go with the best price or bulk load, as the previous poster recommends.

[jay bee]

Thanks folks.

[photobyalan.com]

If bulk-loading your film is only going to save you 10 percent over the cost of buying import film, then it's not anywhere near worth it. Don't forget that you will have to take the time to load those cassettes, and that's time you could be spending taking pictures or in the darkroom. Also, bulk loaders and reusable cassettes are notorious for picking up small bits of dust and other particles that can put a scratch down a whole roll of film, and that's hardly economical.

 

Go with the import film and save your time for shooting.

[jay bee]

Decided to go with the Imported option. Bulk loading is not a thought since I barely have enough time to load film in my cameras!

 

Thx to all.

[r.w._behan]

John, I think you've made a good choice. I've used Tri-X for about 40 years, developing always in 1:1 D-76. Now this may seem curmudgeonly and stubborn, but at least I have a fairly good feel for a rigidly standardized combination. About a year ago, getting back into B&W again rather seriously, I discovered B&H and their imported Tri-X. Bought it. Used it. Like it. Can see utterly no difference in the film. Carry on.