Re: [Leica] Exposing TMAX 400 vs Tri-X

[Steven Alexander <alexpix@worldnet.att.net>]

on 11/8/00 12:23 PM, Mark Rabiner at mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com wrote:
> Also the curve shapes different and could be part of the issue.
> Tri x has a higher toe than T. Max which drops off (down) quicker.
 
> mark rabiner
This topic and discussion has been very interesting and most comments right
on.  I would like to offer two comments.

 First, to compare any two films processed by an unknown manner can reveal
no useful information.  Since a commercial lab was used and since it
processes in Xtol only adds confusion to the mix.  We don't know how, at
separate times, the temps, dilutions etc.  A small aside, many people see no
gain in Xtol/Tri X and a giant advantage for Tmax/Xtol.  Developing your own
film is best but understanding your labs procedures can produce very good
negatives.

Second, as Mark points out, you must understand the characteristics of each
film you use and understand the films relationship to your (Leica OT)
equipment and your working methods.

Two films correctly exposed/processed will not necessarily look the same;
but, should produce proper prints.  In the current ProView, Kodak's
professional adverzine there is a good article on b&w images in which Dr.
Dick Dickerson says, "And never judge process quality by how the negatives
look.  Make your decisions based on how they print!"  He is a former project
manager at Kodak and now teaches and consults in b&w photography.

Test, shoot and test some more.  Find the best EI for your camera, method
and the processing(yours or labs).

Happy snaps,
Steven Alexander