Tri-X 400 or TMax 400?

[Ektagraphic]

Do you shoot more Tri-X 400 or TMax 400. I am just curious. I know that they are really great films and are pretty popular.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I do like Tri-X 400, but recently I been using Tmax 400 more.

Jeff

 

[mopar_guy]

It seems that lately I've been using TMY-2 and TMX-2 more lately.

 

[MikeSeb]

I am slowly moving to 400TMY-2 as my sole B&W film, except for the occasional roll of 320TXP. To my eye, the current iteration of Tri-X looks different, and not different-GOOD, in every developer except HC-110. In that developer, for me it's an EI 250 film.

I love the look of TMY-2 in TMAX and Xtol developers; but I think it looks best of all in good ol' D-76 either straight or 1+1.

 

[removed account4]

i shoot them about the same ...

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I shot two rolls of Tri-X 320 TXP the other day, because they were given to me.

Other than that it's been Tmax 400 all the way for me. If I can afford it, that is. The stuff is very spendy!

 

[bobwysiwyg]

The only time I don't shoot TMax 400 is when I'm using TMax 100. Not necessarily that I think they are 'the' best, just that I'm trying limit myself in terms of film and dev. for a period to keep the variables within reason.

 

[fschifano]

My go to 400 speed film in 35 mm. is Tri-X. I'm using the rebadged stuff offered by Freestyle as Arista Premium 400, and it is considerably less expensive than the Kodak branded stuff. But don't get me wrong. I think that TMY-2 is fantastic and I use that for medium format a lot.

 

[david b]

I shoot a lot of TMY2 in 120. It is my only b+w film at this point. Love it in xtol

 

[jim appleyard]

A lot more TX now that it's Artista Premium!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I shoot Tri-X 400 and 320 and no T-Max 400 at all.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

The only film I'm buying at this point is TMY2. I develop it in highly dilute Rodinal using minimal agitation. Best combo I've found for my tastes.

 

[marcmarc]

I'm also shooting lots of the Arista Premium branded Tri-X. When I first began printing these negs, I was surprised by the results. I wondered "Where is the famous one-of-a-kind Tri-X grain?" Apparently todays Tri-X is nothing like the past. I was really hoping to get that classic look. Maybe I'll try souping in Rodinal rather then HC-110 for this.

 

[sidearm613]

I tried TMY2, but didn't like it. I guess this is the way with all the T-grain films, some swear by them, others like the older films... to each his own. I'll stick with Tri-X, thank you very much. If I may be so obtuse, I would like to think that I will be buried one day with my Pentax 67 and a roll of Tri-X. There's a nice thought...

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Tri-X/120 because it looks so nice in Pyro-HD (or PC-TEA) and pushed in the old AGFA's REFINAL till 1000 ASA...
And I want to be buried with my Hasselblad and a few rolls of that film, and I know it will not be very long till this will happen.

Philippe

 

[StorminMatt]

Since I like my B+W transparencies, Tri-X is FAR more valuable to me. When processed in dr5, the normal ISO for 35mm Tri-X is 320. But the normal dr5 ISO for TMax 400 is a puny 125. This basically makes TMax 400 useless as a high speed B+W slide film, and makes it rather pointless to shoot over, say, TMax 100 (which has a normal dr5 ISO of 100). But Tri-X can still be shot at a reasonably high ISO if processed by dr5 (although not quite as high as HP5).

 

[Henry Alive]

TX400 is the film I shoot.

 

[darkosaric]

Tri-X

 

[modafoto]

Tri-X in Rodinal....I sure like that grain!

 

[mhanc]

For 400 speed film it is TMY-2 in 135, 120 + 8x10. It is a great film AND that they make it in all the formats I traffic in - not a bad combo in this day and age.

 

[MVNelson]

TMY and TMY-2 in Prescysol-ef / Pyrocat-mc is where I've been this year ...

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

You know, it's funny. I've seen and made prints from Tri-X and TMY side by side. From 120 format I can't really tell a difference between them at a 9x9" size.

What are the differences that you, and anybody, feel there is to the end result in the print that make you go one way or another?

For me it's not about ultimate image quality. Both films are super nice that way. But it's about reciprocity characteristics and consistency with the same emulsion from 35mm to 8x10 (or 8x20, which is an idea I'm toying with).
Plus, the two films are so similar anyway, that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to switch around.

I tried TMY2, but didn't like it. I guess this is the way with all the T-grain films, some swear by them, others like the older films... to each his own. I'll stick with Tri-X, thank you very much. If I may be so obtuse, I would like to think that I will be buried one day with my Pentax 67 and a roll of Tri-X. There's a nice thought...

 

[alroldan12]

I like both, but I've had more rewarding results with TX at EI 250 in HC-110(B).

 

[Bruce Watson]

I used Tri-X exclusively (for decades I might add) until I finally gave in to the entreaties of people I knew and tried TMY-2. The difference was amazing. TMY-2 is such a better film. It gives a much more realistic mapping of tones, has much superior reciprocity characteristics, and grain like a 100 speed film.

I never looked back. Never finished the opened box of 5x4 Tri-X I was working my way through. TMY-2 really is that good.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Bruce,

You highlighted something that I forgot to mention in my comment above. I'm comparing TMY-2 to TX 400. Not TXP 320.
I believe the TXP 320 is an entirely different emulsion than the 400 and I don't have too much experience with it.

- Thomas