• 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

HP5 and Tri-X in 120, differences, similarities.. ?

stradibarrius said:
Brian, I will be very interested to see what your test shows this weekend. I like Tri-X and HP5. To me HP5 seems to give an every so slightly more silvery image where Tri-x has a hint of warmth...if that makes sense???
Click to expand...

Yea, both HP5 and Tri-x definitely have a "feel" to each. I just printed two images last night. One on HP5 and one from a tri-x neg. To me tri-x has a time-less quality with very, very pleasing tonality. HP5 seems colder to me, grainier which is nice too, and maybe more "punch," but as stated before, it depends how you define "punch."
 
brian steinberger said:
You're right, they're not recommended but I usually do it through the colder months to bring the tank and reel to temp before dumping developer. I now may forget it.
Click to expand...

I rest the tank in the tempering bath along with the chemicals. A weight (in the form of 1/2 brick) placed on top of the tank keeps it from floating and prevents it from tipping over. Simple and effective.
 

How do you get colder tones in print when the only variable changed was the film?
 
Athiril said:
How do you get colder tones in print when the only variable changed was the film?
Click to expand...

When I think of "cold" it's not always the image tone. Cold to me can mean dis-engaging to the viewer. Just like warm tones generally engage the viewer. HP5, the tonality i mean, just seems cold and dis-engaging, and I don't mean this in a bad way!! Tri-x may be a bit more engaging. That make any sense?
 
Athiril said:
How do you get colder tones in print when the only variable changed was the film?
Click to expand...

Compression, my friend.

Tonality is one thing, curves and response to light are another.

If we were to get subjective - I'd reckon most people would refer to clinical films like TMX and TMY as being "cold" whereas classical films with strong compression like Tri-X, Neopan, etc. come off as warm.

I understand what Brian is saying.
 

Brian, thank you, I am enjoying this thread.

Steve
 
FWIW I have had TriX 120 that is strangely soft. No bite at all. I thought I was going crazy, but when compared to shots from the same camera (Mamiya 7) on anything else, the impression was still there. Funnily enough it does not seem to translate to soft looking prints.

It's not uncommon for medium format negatives to look slightly soft but print sharp. The 120 film area is so large that the smaller enlargement factor contributes to increased resolution.

Concerning Tri-X. Has beautiful tonality but must be shot at ISO 200 or 250 to open up shadows. HP-5 appears sharper as its grain pattern is courser. 135 HP5 grain is more noticeable at 8x enlargement vs Tri-X when developed in a D-76 type developer. More so if using an acutance developer. If using 135 film I suggest avoiding development in Rodinal unless grain is to be part of the aesthetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register