Exposure Latitude Question -- Tri-X v. T-grain films

[zernikepolynom]

I like the picture. This might be due to the fact I'm used to the XP2 look...

[Dan States]

On my screen the image is looks good as far as tonality and composition are concerned. Seems to be some sharpening done and that has created some slightly unnatural edges.

Any film can look great scanned as long as there is not too much contrast. Resist the urge to run for the sharpening tools as they do little to improve 90% of images.

Best wishes
Dan

[innerimager]

Originally Posted by Dan States

On my screen the image is looks good as far as tonality and composition are concerned. Seems to be some sharpening done and that has created some slightly unnatural edges.

Any film can look great scanned as long as there is not too much contrast. Resist the urge to run for the sharpening tools as they do little to improve 90% of images.

Best wishes
Dan

Yes Dan- I tend to run a sharpening for web routine, and do find that often the film images don't need them as my all digital workflow has in the past. Got to break the habit. Thanks...Peter

[batmobile]

One of the reasons cited for TriX, HP5 etc having great latitude is that one can over expose them with less grief than modern films. Neopan 400 is the same. Overexposed Tmax and Delta is more likely to result in bullet proof highlights. The reduced EI and development used by many ensure that you have the best possible chance of a printable neg with both shadows and highlights. Higher contrast printing in the darkroom is no problem and the reduced density of highlights assists scanning.

If you are having problems with grain, consider changing developer if you like TriX otherwise. Xtol 1+1 yields appreciably finer grain than D76 and one gets a bit of a shoulder too so more controlled highlights. Images do however lose some acutance, but still remain fine to me.

Xtol is also great with D400 and will also help control highlights there. Sounds like an overexpose and under decvelop routine could be ideal for you. i regularly print at G4 but never lose a neg due to excessive contrast. mind you my 10x8 colour head is super diffuse.

[tobey bilek]

Use stock D76 for 5 1/2 min at 68. Keep all solutions the same temp including wash. No rinse or ss between dev and fix. 68 means 68. Not 75 and reduced time

All the nasty grain will go away.

Shoot at EI 200 and reduce time 20% for finer grain.

The new PLus X has a similar look to Tri X 7 min @ 68 1:1 dilution

The negs will print on #2 paper witha condenser Focomat IC or 2.75 on a V35.

[D Carter]

Presuming you scan all your negatives, Photoshop (or Gimp) then machine print, is there any advantage of using C41 B&W films over simply using color films and your favorite B&W conversion?

[andym911]

Originally Posted by PATB

I got into black and white photography with the purchase of my MP a little over a year ago. Since then, I have shot 100+ rolls of Tri-X. I love the look and, most importantly, the fact that I can get a printable photo even when the exposure is not precise due to lack of time to meter or lack of metering skill on my part. My only complaint is the grain sometimes get a bit much, especially when scanning with my Coolscan V or enlarging onto 11x14 bw paper.

I have tried a few rolls of Delta 400 and the new T-MAX 400. While they do not have the "classic look" of Tri-X, they don't have much grain either. And I find them easier to scan, which is important to me for vacation shots because my family loves photobooks. So for my next vacation, I am planning on bringing either the Delta or the T-Max. My only concern is that I am not sure of their exposure latitude; I don't have much experience with them compared to Tri-X. More specifically, my question is whether the Delta and T-max require more precise metering compared to good ol' Tri-X. I am not an experienced photographer, so this is a concern to me especially when taking pictures on the run.

Any thoughts on this will be greatly appreciated.

Don't worry about exposure latitude too much.I understand you are changing films because of grain..I suggest you first follow some of the advice here i.e overexposing slightly and underdeveloping.You will then see what TriX is capable of regarding smooth tones and fine grain and excellent sharpness.
If you do decide to change film then the latitude is similar for most 400 rated films today, no big deal within a stop.

good luck
andy

[Dan States]

Originally Posted by andym911

Don't worry about exposure latitude too much.I understand you are changing films because of grain..I suggest you first follow some of the advice here i.e overexposing slightly and underdeveloping.You will then see what TriX is capable of regarding smooth tones and fine grain and excellent sharpness.
If you do decide to change film then the latitude is similar for most 400 rated films today, no big deal within a stop.

good luck
andy

Andy, what an outstanding image! Great tonality and shadow detail and of course a wonderful subject. Can anyone say they have seen this kind of black and white image tonality from digital?

[andym911]

Dan,

thanks so much for your comments...
I have had a few 'heated' threads over the last year regarding B&W shot with the M8, as an example.I own an M8 but gave up on getting pleasing black and whites from it.
Regardless of which PP method I chose the results were unsatisfactory to me.
I went back to film and got what I think is good for me.
Since moving to digital I have never shot so much film

I envy those who can achieve great B&W with digital. I have seen one or two good examples on the web, but really 1 or 2 from thousands of images.
Film remains for me the medium for black and white...

thanks again for your feedback

andy