Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/25

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] WAS: veiling flare on 50/2 NOW: Tri-x.
From: Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:33:56 -0500
References: <625D48C6.58DFBD6F.0000E41E@aol.com> <000701c2f260$2bc1d260$9cad5018@gv.shawcable.net> <44291856.1048537716@berkshire.ldp.com> <006801c2f28d$48dc41a0$9cad5018@gv.shawcable.net>

- --On Monday, March 24, 2003 9:13 PM -0800 Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> 
wrote:

> Rolfe Tessem asked:
>> I assume this was the "new" Tri-X. If so, what are your feelings about it
>> versus the "old" Tri-X. Does the new version really have significantly
>> smaller grain, as has been reported? Inquiring minds want to know ;-).<<<
>
> Hi Rolfe,
> Yes it's the new tri-x. Is the grain finer? Well I suppose so, it looks
> pretty good to Sandy and myself when we've made  16X20 wet prints and
> 13X19 Epson prints.
>
> It appears to have a fine smoothness with nice gradation, yet holds
> excellent Leica glass edge sharpness. It has good detail in the shadow
> areas even though we push it one. But most high end films can easily make
> good prints pushed one.
>
> I used Tmax from the time it arrived in the world and for my first medical
> book, "This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler." Book
> re-productions were beautiful which led to an order for several 60"X40"
> prints in a medical centre board room. Even with that behind me, I
> switched to Tri-x. Actually there were two things that created the return
> to Tri-X. One, making 16X20 prints from some early 1960 negatives of
> assignments shot in Europe, I was really amazed at the quality of the
> negs and prints from exposures made 40 years earlier. ;-)
>
> They had this beautiful tonal gradation, so it got me thinking I should go
> back to Tri-x, particularly if I made negs that looked that good from my
> earlier photo life. Shortly thereafter while visiting Tom Abrahamsson,  he
> showed me  Tri-x prints of his and the switch was a done deal. Tri-x it
> was for the "Women in Medicine" book.
>
> And at the moment from what I've seen in negatives from the 300 plus rolls
> Sandy & I shot during this past 3 months traveling the country, I doubt
> we'll be switching back to Tmax. :-) I trust this answers your,
> >>Inquiring minds want to know?<< :-)

It does, thank you.

I have never been a fan of the Tmax films, but I was curious about the 
recent published report evaluating the changes in Kodak B&W films after 
manufacturing was consolidated in one plant.

That report, written by the now-retired inventors of Xtol, said that the 
grain in Tri-X has decreased significantly, while the grain in TMY has 
actually increased in size. Go figure.

Rolfe
- --
Rolfe Tessem
rolfe@ldp.com
Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from P2CON@aol.com (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)
Message from Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com> (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> ([Leica] WAS: veiling flare on 50/2 NOW: Tri-x.)