Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/09/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] T-max vs. Tri-X
From: "Joe Stephenson" <joeleica@email.msn.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 16:52:14 -0700

Steve,
I would encourage anyone to try Agfapan100. It is a classic grain film that
provides great latitude and beautiful tonal range. I like it very much. I
also like Ilford Delta 100, and for that matter Tmas100 is a fine film. I've
made prints I like very much from all three, but I don think Agrapan has the
best ability to reproduce skin tones. I find TriX400 a bit grainy, but the
speed can be helpful.
regards,
Joe Stephenson
- -----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Kobrin <skobrin@yahoo.com>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 12:58 PM
Subject: [Leica] T-max vs. Tri-X

>I visited a friend in St. Louis this weekend who does beautiful B&W
>work, especially in-context portraits.  She argued strongly that the
>tonal range and reproduction of Tri-X cannot be matched by T-Max 100
>or 400 and that the more visible grain is a trade-off gladly taken. I
>must say her prints were spectacular.
>
>I find that with my scanner and current printer I cannot go much
>beyond 5X7; by 8X10 the image clearly looks electronic.  That being
>the case, grain may not be that much of an issue.  Also, from what I
>read, Tri-X is much easier to handle than T-Max.
>
>Any opinions about this on the LUG?
>
>
>Steve
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>