22 February 2007

Tri-X - anything else needed...?

Dateline 1940: “The fastest film in the world is the new Tri-X, with
twice the speed of Super-XX.” If you want the numbers, the British
Journal of Photography Almanac for 1940 (actually written in 1939)
reckoned it was 7000 H&D.

Tri-X processed in ID11 plus

Sometimes I am contemplating if any other film than Tri-X is needed?
classic which was introduced as early as 1939-40 as sheet film,
and 1954 as
roll film 135 and 120 formats. The most recent version
packs a few years and it
is my impression that the grain has become
even more appealing, and that
tonality has improved. Tri-X is fantastic.
It stretches the tonal curve in
shadows like no other film.

Tri-X precessed in X-tol

Tri-X and D-76 is a well proven combination of
film/developer, but now I have
begun using X-tol which works equally well, and
in addition is less hazardous
to the environment. If however you want the
smallest grain and maximum
resolution, it can be a good idea to make your own
D76, and in this case
replace the metolen with fenidon, with the strength of 0,3

This will give you Ilfords late ID11 plus, which has been
D76 and ID11 are known to be basically the same developers, only Ilford
made a
special version named ID11 plus. More expensive, but by what I can
see from my
Tri-X negatives from this time, it renders a clearly finer grain
and a
delightful tone/resloution of detail. With this developer the following
question is brought to life:

Is there any need for more than Tri-X?
Pictures and text by Nils Bergqvist who kindly translated his article to English.
See the original text (in Swedish) here. -urbano


F said...

Really nice to see you here Nils! And I really hope that you will continue to write stuff here.

Very intresting!


Anonymous said...

there is one simple answer to your question: No.

Anonymous said...

If you like to see larger picture files for study of grain etc, go to my swedish version of the article.

Anonymous said...

Still loves it