theendlesshouse Posted December 5, 2011 Share #1 Posted December 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've used trix and d-76 for years and have noticed recently a drop in quality of my negatives the emulsion is thinner and they do not print as well. My process/water is the same etc. The films come from different batches so it is not a bad batch. Has anyone else noticed a change or should Iook elsewhere for the cause of this? Regards Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Hi theendlesshouse, Take a look here Tri-X Drop in quality?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
firststream Posted December 5, 2011 Share #2 Posted December 5, 2011 Lately I've found my development times had to be increased. Currently working in Rodinal at 50 +1, and my time has gone from 13 minutes to 16. I thought maybe it was an inaccuracy in my thermometer (so I purchased two more to find some sort of normal), maybe it was the batch of developer, maybe it was from incorrect meter-reading. Blaming it on the film might be the answer; I'd really like to hear if anyone else is experiencing this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted December 5, 2011 Share #3 Posted December 5, 2011 I recently developed a roll of Tri-X in Rodinal also at 50-1 for 14 minutes. I found my negatives were "slightly" dense, but I also shot them through a medium red filter with a 3 f-stop filter factor. Other than that, no it looks the same to me as it has for years. I just wish I could fix the curling problem. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 5, 2011 Share #4 Posted December 5, 2011 I've used trix and d-76 for years and have noticed recently a drop in quality of my negatives the emulsion is thinner and they do not print as well. My process/water is the same etc. The films come from different batches so it is not a bad batch. Has anyone else noticed a change or should Iook elsewhere for the cause of this? Regards Mark I have noticed the same but attributed it to age and my changing perception. Thinking back on how many times Tri-X has been changed I think you might be right. If you have, or can borrow a 120 camera, try Tri-X Pro. I hope it has not changed. (Lord, do they still make it? I'm living off a freezer supply.) And it never curled in the old days. Quite disappointing to find them mucking with success. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted December 5, 2011 Share #5 Posted December 5, 2011 Kodak definitely changed the formulas of Tri-X and Plus-X (R.I.P.) when they were rebranded as 400TX and 125PX about 7 years ago. Kodak said as much at the time, saying the reformulation was needed for the machines in their new (downsized) B&W coating facility (there may also have been environmental reasons for the changes). Even published new development time charts. Their corporatespeak said the "quality" had not changed, of course. There is a long discussion of changes in TX and developers on APUG here: tri-x history (and d76 history) If you have seen "newer" changes - well, according to the Kodak engineer in that APUG thread, Kodak is always tweaking things. And with the price of silver rocketing up last year, they may well have nudged the silver content down slightly. ________ BTW - ALL Kodak B&W films (for that matter, all their films, period) now say "Kodak Professional" on the box (and on their web site). The ISO 320 version TXP is only available in sheet film. It was discontinued in 120/220 in Feb. 2010. KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X Films 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted December 6, 2011 Share #6 Posted December 6, 2011 A small correction to my previous post - Kodak does have four non-"Professional" films, all color negs (Ultramax 400 + 800, High-Definition 400, Super 200). The "drugstore" films. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen in Montreal Posted December 7, 2011 Share #7 Posted December 7, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Spot on, Kodak messed with the holy grail in 2007. Like many, I am still not too happy about it, nothing out there is like the old tri-x. Kodak definitely changed the formulas of Tri-X and Plus-X (R.I.P.) when they were rebranded as 400TX and 125PX about 7 years ago. Kodak said as much at the time, saying the reformulation was needed for the machines in their new (downsized) B&W coating facility (there may also have been environmental reasons for the changes). Even published new development time charts. Their corporatespeak said the "quality" had not changed, of course. There is a long discussion of changes in TX and developers on APUG here: tri-x history (and d76 history) If you have seen "newer" changes - well, according to the Kodak engineer in that APUG thread, Kodak is always tweaking things. And with the price of silver rocketing up last year, they may well have nudged the silver content down slightly. ________ BTW - ALL Kodak B&W films (for that matter, all their films, period) now say "Kodak Professional" on the box (and on their web site). The ISO 320 version TXP is only available in sheet film. It was discontinued in 120/220 in Feb. 2010. KODAK PROFESSIONAL TRI-X Films Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted December 7, 2011 Share #8 Posted December 7, 2011 Just a small test on iso 400 films: Digitaltruth Photo In sharpness and grain Tri-X 400 is just a moderate iso 400 film. But on the other hand a very flexible film. But looking on lp/mm and sharpness even an Agfa Gevaert aviation film (Rollei Retro 400S) is better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theendlesshouse Posted December 7, 2011 Author Share #9 Posted December 7, 2011 (edited) Im glad it is not just me, I put it down to my thermometers being old and bought a new one and they were identical. Such a shame if it's true. I also noticed the curling. Ive been looking at the Adox films with renewed interest having recently tried their papers and been impressed with some. Edited December 7, 2011 by theendlesshouse Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted December 7, 2011 Share #10 Posted December 7, 2011 I also noticed the curling Yes, Tri-X 400 especially on 120 roll film is very curly. The same like Efke or Fomapan which are made on Polyester layer. I have to process many 120 Tri-X 400 films now and it's impossible to put 2 films on one reel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen in Montreal Posted December 10, 2011 Share #11 Posted December 10, 2011 ......... I also noticed the curling......... I posted this a while back, Tri-x vs HP5 film curl. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/167926-tri-x-drop-in-quality/?do=findComment&comment=1867097'>More sharing options...
theendlesshouse Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share #12 Posted January 4, 2012 Made the switch from trix to HP5 over Christmas as I was noticing more and more the quality shift, liking HP5 very much thus far especially with HC110. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen in Montreal Posted January 8, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 8, 2012 Made the switch from trix to HP5 over Christmas as I was noticing more and more the quality shift, liking HP5 very much thus far especially with HC110. HP-5 is really nice in Pyro too. It scans and prints very well. I use PMK until my supply is out, and then will try to settle in to Pyro-HD. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.