[Leica] should be Tmax 3200 at 1600/was TriX at 800

["Gary Klein" <leicaman@lakebreeze.org>]

Here are my two cents on this issue. Just to let you folks know where I am
coming from on these two films.

I used Tmax P3200 when it first came out in the 1980s and have been using
Tri-X since 1975.  Tri-X has changed from time to time and my file of negs
bears this out.  Since then I probably have shot forty rolls a week of Tri-X
and at least two to three of P3200 when we were shooting film at the paper.
At my present paper of course we are digital and use Canon EOS 1d digital
cameras.  I still will shoot film on my Leica if a job demands a quiet small
camera. Its not often these days.  A Canon EOS 1d is really not unobtrusive.
I now use my Leica M a lot more at home as a result of digital.  My Leica
used to get nearly daily use on the job.

I really like P3200 at 3200.  I do like not care if I lose some shadow
detail.  For me it was a matter of being able to get the shot without flash.
I usually souped it in Tmax developer, but was careful to with my times as I
felt Kodak's times were a little too heavy for my tastes.  I under developed
by at least 30 seconds.  In D-76, it is developed ever so slightly less too.
But then I tend to slightly overexpose my film, which bears out my
development ritual.  Usually a third f-stop.

We often used P3200 at 6400.  At the time it was a revolutionary film.  We
had very poor lighting levels at the high school football fields I was
assigned to work at.  Usually I used a Nikkor 200mm f2 and I was usually
shooting at a 1/500th at f2 at 6400.  Truly grim stuff.  It was heaven sent
in my view at the time.  A pj friend of mine routinely used it at 12500, but
that was way beyond any expectation of quality.

With pushed Tri-X I usually developed it in Acufine 1 to 1.  With ISO 1600
its like 14 minutes at 70 deg F and when I dared to shove tri x to 3200 it
was 21 minutes at 70 degree F.  Agitation was 10 seconds every minute (four
tank inversions during that interval).

With Tri-X at the longer soak time, I use a hardening fix and then wash the
film for no more than five minutes as the emulsion would become very soft in
this state.  Base fog would become quite apparent.   At the 3200 rating
Tri-X simply doesn't have shadow detail.  At 1600 it is lovely and I have
made 16X20s while sharp, had apparent grain that doesn't bother me.  Some
folks do not like grain at all. I like what feeling it can invoke on an
image.

Tri-x for a majority of my shoots was rated at 640 using HC-110 dilution b
for 20 seconds less than Kodak's suggestions.  640 is in my view the
sweetest spot of Tri-X.  But then I don't like using slow films.  640 was
and is my favorite position for this film.

My final thoughts on this topic is that it is really up to the individual to
decide what is best for them in regards to ISO ratings and so forth. If you
don't process your own film, of course you are at a disadvantage.

Tri-X is still my favorite film of course.

gck

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html