• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

400 film?

Call Freestyle--It shows in stock

Rick
 
Neopan 400 in 120 has been discontinued. It is still being manufactured in 35 mm format. The closest replacement you'll find for Neopan 400 in 120 would be Tri-X 400. When printed, the two are almost indistinguishable from each other. Neopan 400 was selling at bargain basement prices by comparison, thus it's popularity with me and more than a few other photographers out there. But yeah, if you're looking for a replacement, Tri-X will do nicely.
 
Tri-X is almost the same as Neopan 400. Grain wise and resolution they are nearly identical, but their tonal characteristics are a little different. The Neopan has a bit of a shoulder that could make life difficult for you if you don't watch it in film processing. Tri-X is more linear in its response and therefore a bit more forgiving in its nature.

But it's undoubtedly a really good substitute.
 

Attachments

  • TX-NP400.jpg
    80.5 KB · Views: 128
Actually, you might wish to give Ilford Delta 400 a go. Its characteristic curve looks more like Neopan 400 than Tri-X 400.
There is a slight shoulder with it. Not as much as Neopan 400, where the whole tonal curve from mid-tones and up is shouldering, but there is a shoulder at the top.

- Thomas
 

Attachments

  • Delta 400.jpg
    65.9 KB · Views: 107
I have shot several rolls of Delta 400 and have been impressed. I also loved Tri-X 320 but it's gone too. Thomas your shots of Fergus and Maggie with Tmax are nice. I know it is different film from Neopan but...
 
Thomas Bertilsson said:
...The Neopan has a bit of a shoulder that could make life difficult for you if you don't watch it in film processing...
Click to expand...

Thomas, Neopan does have more shoulder than 400TX, but not as much as the graphs show. You see, in Kodak's chart, the Y axis scale (density) is longer than the X axis scale. If you "normalise" it (compress image at the Y axis by 20%) 400TX will have more obvious shoulder. Still more linear than Neopan though.
 
Yes, you are right. Here is another picture where the scale of the Neopan has been compressed to the exact same height and width as the Tri-X. And I think the difference is still clear.

I was merely pointing out the difference between the two. If you severely overdevelop Neopan 400 it will block up like a bullet proof vest. Tri-X is not so sensitive.

- Thomas

 

Attachments

  • TX-NP400.jpg
    70.9 KB · Views: 125
Here is a version of the graph where I superimposed the Neopan 400 curve directly on top of the Tri-X 400 curve. It's a little clearer this way.

The scale on both X and Y axis have been aligned before the superimposition.

Pardon my terrible Photoshop skills...

I hope this illustrates better the differences between Neopan and Tri-X.

- Thomas
 

Attachments

  • TX-NP400overlay.jpg
    62.2 KB · Views: 134
ic-racer said:
You need to be more careful of overexposure.
Click to expand...

In practical terms, that about sums it up. A film with a more pronounced shoulder will blow out the highlights faster. Less dramatically, it will make delicate highlights harder to separate out on the print.
 
fschifano said:
In practical terms, that about sums it up. A film with a more pronounced shoulder will blow out the highlights faster. Less dramatically, it will make delicate highlights harder to separate out on the print.
Click to expand...

Yeah, thanks for that explanation.
I sometimes loose details in the highlights with Neopan 400 and especially 1600.
 
trix all the way.... well suited in rodinal 1:50 14 minutes, and if the thing darkens you can develop in diafine in 1600 and get superb results.
not to mention stand processing...

also because is super manipulative
and for all the technical - tonal reasons too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register