Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>> This means that if you expose at 3200, much of the shadow detail you might >> expect will simply disappear. In fact, my view is that they only offer about >> one and a half stop's true speed increase over good old Tri-X or TMY. > - --------------- > > At what ASA are you exposing the Tri-x at to achieve these results? What I meant here was that the 'real' speed of Tri-X is about a stop and a half less than P3200 (YMMV). I got this result by metering extremely carefully, and exposing both films at a variety of ASAs on the same roll (all the way from 100 to 6400, in fact), then developing for the same amount of time in the same developer (35 minutes in D23 diluted 1+3 at 68F, though the developer is immaterial in this test). Then I put the negatives against each other on a light box, and slid them around until the negatives matched for shadow density. I would say that up to 1600 ASA Tri-X is preferable, beyond that either TMY in TMAX developer or one of the 3200 films. - -- Johnny Deadman "One is ashamed to want so much for oneself - but how else are you going to justify your failure and your effort?" - Robert Frank