Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]"Peter A. Klein" wrote: > > shino@ubspainewebber.com says: > > > i think it's a very nice photo, and a very nice scan. > > the tonality of the overalls and the texture of the > > walls are nicely captured. it would have been very > > easy to crank the contrast up too much. > > > shows you what a leica, tri-x and d76 can do! :-) > > Thanks! But Tri-X sure has improved in the last 29 years. Compare > these two: > > 1972: http://www.2alpha.com/~pklein/oldpics/framer.htm (Tri-X, D76 > 1:1, > DR 50 Summicron). > > 2001: http://www.2alpha.com/~pklein/currentpics/mischabutter.jpg (Tri-X > 2001, > processing by Kodak in T-Max developer, 35mm pre-asph Summicron. > Subject > is my late father-in-law, Mischa). > > Tri-X today seems almost as good as Plus-X was in the 70s. Granted, > there are also differences in lens and developer, but still... > > Speaking of which, is there any advantage to using T-Max developer on > Tri-X? Or is that what Kodak uses on all B&W because it works and they > don't have to change chemicals? > > --Peter Geese Peter! not real scientific to put it mildly! If you only had run the later Tri x in D76 1:1 as well we'd have a real comparison!! Many people (Erwin perhaps?) feel tri x had gone downhill over the decades. aint what it used to be. Its true that "half and half" is really "one third - two thirds" so i'd belive anything. Tri harder x... The fact that Ansel Adams shot and got such results from it in medium format (in the 1970's) instead of 100 speed films or slower (on his tripod) is something (and in HC-110 yet) that many have to toss and turn over every night after running their 100 speed sheet film in an acutance developer. The world is only interesting because of all the aberrations, aberrances, and anomalies. Not to mention the aborigines! Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/