got film?

[marcosb]

just got this today 20 rolls of film Kodak 400TX

wonder what am going to use it for

[KJ Smith]

Why Tri-X?

[marcosb]

cheap and experation date is 02 2013

Why you ask is not good? likre really bad

please let me know

[KJ Smith]

Its fine.

But T-Max is much better.

[marcosb]

$2.50 a roll got me
I'll try T-max next time

[kmarriner]

I prefer tri-x to tmax to be honest.. Tri-x looks amazing when pushed to 1600.

[Valerie]

Nothing at all wrong with TriX. Kevin is just trying to make trouble (again)

[KJ Smith]

Of course its all a matter of opinion.

But TMax has a lot more latitude.

The 100 (TMX) can be shot 100 or 200 no pushing.

The 400 (TMY2) can be 400 or 800 same thing.

Way better shadow detail.

But if you like grain and contrast, TriX may be the film for you....

The 400, TMY2 was just upgraded this year.

One of the newest offerings from Kodak.

Threw that in for the "film is dead" folks.

[marcosb]

call me craz

[Daniel W.]

If you like contrast, the Arista branded Fomapan 400 is super-contrasty straight out of camera. ($2.40 for the 400 flavor, 2.30 for 100). I like Neopan 400 a bit better because on occasion you can find it in stock more often than Tri-X and self-adhesive seal (no licking!)

[marcosb]

THIs is my first time shooting this film , The one i like better is delta 100 for my B&W
what you all think of this film, am also trying neopan ACROS 100, I will upload some pics later .

[chris00nj]

I like Tri-X. Low grain, very forgiving exposure and developing. T-Max is has less grain, but is more finicky in developing.

Tri-X, 35mm, with a 60 year old lens:

[KJ Smith]

Originally Posted by chris00nj

I like Tri-X. Low grain, very forgiving exposure and developing. T-Max is has less grain, but is more finicky in developing.

I have never heard TriX described as low grain.

What makes you say TMax is "finicky"?

[chris00nj]

Originally Posted by KJ Smith

I have never heard TriX described as low grain.

What makes you say TMax is "finicky"?

Kodak calls it low grain. I tend to agree. Especially in 120 format, it is very hard to see.

I wouldn't call the photo I just posted as "high grain"

[KJ Smith]

Originally Posted by chris00nj

Kodak calls it low grain. I tend to agree. Especially in 120 format, it is very hard to see.

I wouldn't call the photo I just posted as "high grain"

Kodak calls it fine grain, high sharpness.

See Here.

It would be difficult to see grain on the size image you are showing.


Most people that I know that shoot TriX, shoot it for its apparent grain.

It can be very nice when used correctly.