Leaving Tri-X

I'm down to my last 30 or so rolls of Tri-X. I've fed my 6x6 hasselblad a stict diet of tri-x over the years, developed mostly in Xtol in a Jobo rotary thing.

I love the grain and the pushability, i never use flash. I've rated at everything between 200 and 3200.

I print with a Devere 504/Ilford Multigrade500/80mm Componon S onto papers like. Agfa Classic, Ilford Multigrade, [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]Oriental Seagull [lith][/size][/font]

I suspect Kodak will be first to abandon us altogether. So I'm going to jump before I'm pushed.

Is there anyone that has been using TriX for years and has moved to another film? Can anyone make a suggestion given the info I provided above.

Fintan

I have started using more and more Ilford HP5+ now that Kodak may be stepping off the analog wagon. Great universal film for pushing up to 3200 (and maybe beyond...)

APX400 is not my cup of Rodinal...but it may be an ok alternative for you.
As I recall Fuji has a Neopan 400. Never really used it, so no comments on that from me.

Otherwise check out the smaller brands like Efke, Foma and others.

Fintan said:

So I'm going to jump before I'm pushed.

Click to expand...

Hi Fintan, I hope you handle life different than film. Why leave the good stuff while it's still around?

Just enjoy today and leave tomorrows worries for next week.

cheers!
Quinten

I have to say I'm reaching a similar conclusion but for ENTIRELY different reasons. I have been feeding my cameras TX for a considerable while now, and it has been mostly an uphill battle. I tried some HP5 and right off the bat got exactly what I wanted. Different sort of grain, but the tones were miles better than what I've been getting with the 400TX.
That said, Kodak is a pretty stupid company right now as far as we are concerned. However, I highly highly doubt you will have any trouble getting your fix of Tri-X for years to come... so leaving it "just in case" seems quite silly.

Tri X will be the last film made by anybody, anywhere, ever.

Kodak will NOT stop making film because, stupid as the management is, film is Kodak's source of cash. Not paper, film.

I can understand an inquisitive decision to look at an alternative film - after all you may like it better.

But to decide to change if it isn't better? Why wouldn't it be sensible to continue to use your preferred film for as long as it's available whilst knowing what the fallback is if its discontinued or even out of stock. Why switch now unless you know that your quality of work will be at least maintained? In the event that TX is discontinued, do you think there'll be a queue for Ilford that you won't be allowed to join without having displayed prior loyalty?

Just a couple of final thoughts for you. First, do you think that by behaving in this way you might just contribute to the decision you fear? Second, taking a longer term viewpoint, do you think that because Ilford has fought its way out of difficulty recently that the availability of HP5 ( as todays most accessible alternative) is any more guaranteed than Tri-X?

I used Tri-X/HC-110 for 30-years. Kodak annoyed me by making changes in the film and developer. When they made their last change - what, three years ago, I began looking around. I found Efke PL100 for my 8x10 and loved it. But I wanted the 400 speed Tri-X had given me for my 4x5 and 2x3 Speed Graphics and 35mm. I tried HP5+ and it was OK. I'm now trying Classic 400 and I think I like it a lot - maybe as much as Tri-X. I'm developing in Pyrocat HD. You might want to give that film a try.

Thanks for all the replies so far. I would be really obliged if you would stick to the question I asked about alternatives to Tri-X and not question my reasoning for changing.

Thanks,

Fintan

Fintan said:

Thanks for all the replies so far. I would be really obliged if you would stick to the question I asked about alternatives to Tri-X and not question my reasoning for changing.

Thanks,

Fintan

Click to expand...

Wow, after your firm admonition to stick to the question, you took the wind out of my sails. I am still feeding my Hassy a steady diet of the "old tri-x". I have somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 rolls of the old stuff left; so I will stay in denial before I try another film in 120 (I have close to 200 rolls + 100 ft bulk load of it in 35mm). I am in the process of moving up to 4X5 and the first film that I am testing is HP-5. I want to stick with a traditional silver film and I want the ~400 speed. I also want to continue using HC-110. I plan to buy enough of the stuff that will probably last me most of my remaining active years.

I think I stuck to the question.... Naw!!! I can't help myself... Why in the hell are you panicking so Quick!!!!

I second Quinten's comment. If people stop using Tri-X it will only guanrantee that production will stop.

Fintan said:

suspect Kodak will be first to abandon us altogether. So I'm going to jump before I'm pushed.

Click to expand...

Just use the best film available for you as long as it's available. Not liking the ship's Captain is no reason to volunteer to walk the plank.

I must say that I have been having the same thoughts as Fintan.

I've never been a big Kodak person anyway so switching all of my chemicals to Ilford makes sense to me. I've never used their papers and barely used their films. So my thoughts as of late have been to give all of my money and time to a company that wants this, Ilford.

Kodak will evolve into something else but Ilford will always be a black and white photo company. I doubt we will be seeing an Ilford Super Zoom Camera Phone anytime soon.

But I will say this, I do think Tri-X and D-76 will be around for a very long time.

I might be wrong but it is my understanding that Kodaks new film plant is a "Turn key" operation. It is made of stand alone equipment and could be broken down, shipped, reassembled in a generic building large enough (China by some thoughts) and turn the key and you have the same operation in a new location. I hope we have the current Kodak films for a long time even under a new owner but I must admit it killed my portraits and abstract reticulated work when I lost plus-x in sheet film. I will still use Kodak and Ilford But I am moving towards Efke for 8x10.

The most logical replacement in my mind would be HP5, based on availability. It has a different tonal reproduction than Tri-X, however.
The Classic400 from JandC seems to be another option. A lot of people liking tri-x usually speaks fondly of it. Another company that seems to get high ratings is Foma. I believe they have a 400 speed emulsion. The 200 is supposed to be awesome. True speed as well, like Tri-X and HP5. I have no idea how these push, however.

I'm doing the opposite of what you're doing, I'm exploring Tri-X as a future option...

Good luck,

- Thom

I have always used Ilford anyway and prefer their products, so I'd recommend HP5. Ironically, though, I have recently started using Tri-X as it seems to be the only fast B&W film still available in 220.

David.

So what developers are being used with the HP5+ ?

Fintan said:

Thanks for all the replies so far. I would be really obliged if you would stick to the question I asked about alternatives to Tri-X and not question my reasoning for changing.

Thanks,

Fintan

Click to expand...

While there are many alternative 400 films,
there is no equivalant film to Tri-X.


Good luck.

david b said:

So what developers are being used with the HP5+ ?

Click to expand...

Rodinal 1+50

Fintan,
I used to use HP5+ in my Hasselblad, developed in ID-11/D-76, then switched to TriX 320 for a bit and liked it a lot with Rodinal 1-50, but I am switching back to HP5+.
Reasons:
- Its a lot easier to find around here
- It's cheaper
- I really like HP5+ (eg. my Angel photos have been shot with it and it shows great tonallity (there was a url link here which no longer exists))
- I don't like some weird details of the TriX 120 reel like its one groove (in contrast to the easier loading cross groove) and sometimes the sticky tape is too far back.
- Its easier to find the times for Ilford films as the british company is more relaxed with its info regarding combos with other brands (for example I love Ilfosol-S as a developer and can't find times for TriX)
- I use chemicals, paper and my other two films (PanF+, FP4+) are Ilford, so it makes for an easier business for me

I was doing very well with FP4+ and Perceptol in 120 format. Then Ilford dropped Perceptol, so I changed over to XTOL, and am back to being pretty happy with the results. Now I too am starting to get Kodaphobia, wondering if I should seek out a new developer (or just wait & hope for Perceptol to come back). I wonder how long KRST will be around? That seems like a no-brainer for a bean counter to axe.

Fintan, Have you tried Kodak 400 TMax? I too have used much Tri-X but, recently shot about ten rolls of 400 TMax and just fell in love. I'm toying with the idea of selling the remaining rolls of Tri-X in my fridge, stocking up on 400 TMax and not looking back. Not because I'm concerned about the future availability of either film though....

I do not believe that anybody can predict with any certainty what-so-ever the future availability of Kodak, Ilford or any other B&W film. Any attempt to do so is necessarily based upon pure speculation. I really don't believe that even the CEO of the big yellow company himself can tell us for sure what products will be available five, ten years from now. It is folly to abandon something that works so well and is currently readily available based entirely upon gut feeling and internet rumors. (opinion offered here for free - take it at face value).

Fintan, I have used Kodak materials since 1954.

I shot my way through Art Center with 4x5 Plus-X in D-76, printed on Medalist in Dektol.

I earned my living with Kodak materials when their product catalogue looked more like the NYC Yellow Pages than today's slim pamphlet.

I have watched as they discontinued literally hundreds of products: Super XX, Plus-X, Ektapan, Verichrome, Panatomic-X, and now the last few of many, many very fine papers.

Every time a product dies, the terminally cheery among us reaffirm that surely this will be the last one to go. Not to worry. Until it happens again. And again. And again...

It seems that Kodak has many retirees whose pensions must be paid. And huge healthcare benefit commitments to be met. There is just no way they can afford to run a low-volume modest business. So when sales slow down, the product is automatically dropped. No discussion, no warning.

Betting that Tri-X will always be there just isn't the sure thing it once was. Somewhere there is a secret sales quota Tri-X must meet. When that number is no longer reached, they just pull the plug. Period. Like a ticking timebomb.

As long as you are satisfied with your results, there is perhaps no need to stop using Tri-X film overnight. No instant emergency. But I would think it only prudent to have a standby product waiting for that inevitable day.

And I certainly would not, as a beginner with Kodak products, spend hundreds of dollars and hundreds of hours running exposure and development tests on Tri-X. What a waste, if a newbie just got proficient with the film, only to have it suddenly yanked off the market.

As the safest place to turn for a replacement, all things considered I would have to recommend Ilford. No one else has the combination of stable size, international marketing network and commitment to black and white.

HP-5 Plus may or may not be everything Tri-X is. Or it may be better. But it is much more likely to be manufactured. Shall we now discuss the relative qualities of FP-4 vs. Plus-X sheet film?

John Cook said:

...spend hundreds of dollars and hundreds of hours running exposure and development tests on Tri-X...

Click to expand...

I'm sure you're joking... If it takes ANYONE hundreds of dollars and hundreds of hours to figure out speed and development... Then I think they need to get their head examined!

I know you don't want to hear it but stick with what you like for now... When the day comes, pick up a bunch of rolls, run some tests and you'll be back up to speed in no time. Having a back-up for "one day" doesn't help because films do evolve and change.

As for your question... If you must, try HP5+.

joe

Tri-X is their best seller BW film. I would see Tmax disapear first.
I will stick with it as long as I can.
As a painfull replacement, I would go for HP5, J&C 400 and wait for a chinese Tri-X...

david b said:

So what developers are being used with the HP5+ ?

Click to expand...

ID11

David.