[Leica] Some new Tri-X work, marginally scanned

[hlritter at bex.net (Howard Ritter)]

I decided to take a film camera (M3, 50 ?lux, Tri-X) along on our trip to 
London on the Queen Mary 2. Here are some of the results. And I finished one 
of the rolls at home with an M5 that I wanted to check for light-tightness 
and approximate shutter accuracy.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Tri-X_001/


The film was developed by a custom lab (Digi-Graphics) and I intended to 
scan it myself but found that the film adapter for my earlier Nikon Coolscan 
doesn?t work with the 5000, and the older scanner uses the obsolete SCSI 
connector, so is incompatible with my current computers. I took the 
developed film to a local photo store (they don?t develop B&W any longer) 
for scanning and had them done at an advertised 2000 dpi, which seems to be 
correct, as the files are ~6 MB. So the files look pretty granular. Somehow 
it managed to scan a 36-exp roll in what seemed like one minute; I have no 
idea how it does it so fast. I have just bought the correct film adapter on 
eBay and I hope to make the files look better by scanning the negs at 4500 
dpi, equivalent to a 30-MB sensor.

Parenthetically, it?ll be interesting to see how the detail and resolution 
in a good scan of a Tri-X frame compare to FF digital files of various 
sizes. With this in mind, I took a picture of my standard target for such 
tests, a house across the quarry, with the M5. I?ll post it when I get a 
decent scan.

BTW, the kid (about 30 years old) managing the photo shop insisted that 
Kodak had stopped producing Tri-X. And it took me several minutes of careful 
explanation to convince him that he was incorrect in thinking that larger 
pixels on a sensor make for more detailed photos. This is the last surviving 
photographic store in Toledo. All they sell is accessories, Lomography gear, 
C41 processing, custom prints, and studio time.

?howard