Tri-X Today and Yesterday

[ColColt]

Somewhere I've read recently that the Tri-X of the 70-90's is not the same as the Tri-X of today...meaning developers and developing times back then can't be used with what's made today. Is there any credence to that? I use to use Tri-X with two developers with mostly either ID-11 Plus or Rodinal-many times with HC-110 and Dil B 1:31 for 5 1/2 minutes.

Long ago I had wondered how long ID-11 Plus would be around and made a very comparable developer I called "D-76 Plus" using the following formula for Tri-X. It worked like a charm.

H2O-750ml
Metol-30 gr(2g)
Sodium Sulfite-1500 gr or 100g
Hydroquinone-85 gr or 5.5g
Kodalk-38 gr or 2.5g
H2O to make 1 liter
Dilute 1:1

 

[nathantw]

Don't know the answer. I do know that prices seemed to have jumped quite a bit from the times I used to buy the film back in the 80s and 90s. The prices today are $9 a roll of 36 exposures.

 

[ColColt]

I know...it's crazy what film and development cost anymore. Use to you could buy a 36 exposure roll of K64 and have it developed as well for under $8.

 

[vdonovan]

$8 in 1980 is the same as $23 now, when adjusted for inflation.

 

[ColColt]

In 1980 I was working and making a bit over $30K a year. Being retired now and no steady check coming in I still like the 1980 prices better.

 

[Xmas]

They change

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_Tri-X

Think the last change of times was more rescently than 2007.

 

[ColColt]

In 2007, Tri-X was extensively re-engineered, receiving the new designation 400TX in place of TX or TX400, and became finer-grained.

I'm ok with the finer grain although it takes away from the way it was but no mention as to developer/times being altered. I haven't used a roll in years but had an itch to try some lately and maybe even develop it myself. No telling what the labs use to develop it today. I'm sure Rodinal and HC-110 is still around. I think Rodinal goes by another name but that name escapes me.

It just came to me...Adox Rodinal instead of the old Agfa.

 

[rthollenbeck]

No doubt per unit cost of manufacturing is effected by less overall demand for film as well.

 

[ColColt]

I fought the digital age with a passion and would not have a digital camera or no AF lens. Sometimes you're forced into getting out of your Luddite suit and catching up with the times. I still think it's a shame about Kodak and have sweet memories of the smell of my darkroom and being able to do it all myself...precious memories. We have ourselves to blame.

A local drug store nearby just last year carried Tri-X. I should have picked up a case of it while it was there and still offered. today I went there to pick up a prescription and walked over to the area where they once sold film and there was none of any kind. But, there were plenty of Sandisk cards available.

 

[Dr Croubie]

It's definitely changed, I've got both types in my fridge.
The new stuff, in some photos, I can barely tell the grain from TMY (maybe I'm not looking close enough or printing big enough).
The old stuff, you can sand your floors with the grain, even 135 printed on 4x6".
Doens't mean it's bad, I just use it for different things, depending on when I want grain or not.

 

[Xmas]

They changed times in 2007...

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.pdf

But I'm sure they changed times in 2012 again, as I stand for an hour in 1+100 Rodinal I ignore warnings on boxes, YMMV.

 

[MattKing]

I don't shoot Tri-X normally, but I haven't noticed any undocumented significant changes in the other Kodak films and chemicals I do use regularly.

AFAIK, Tri-X hasn't changed in any significant way since the 2007 re-working.

Other than price and local availability, of course.

 

[Lamar]

Tri-X in its current form is my favorite B&W. The perfect 400 film. The old stuff was a bit too grainy for my liking.

 

[Dali]

They certainly changed their recipe as it looks less grainy to me than it was. Nevertheless, it is still a standard to me. If I had to choose 1 Film? Tri-X!

 

[DcAnalogue]

I used Tri-X in late '70s and liked it in Rodinal.
Actually (I went back to film last year) I'm using the new Tri-X (especially 120) in Rodinal and it seems IMHO less grainy and with a better greyscale results... One of the best film I've ever used!

 

[Mark Antony]

Kodak has constantly improved Tri-x (and their whole range) since its introduction. The film is a top class emulsion, with fine grain (for the speed) and excellent tonality in a wide range of developers.
I can say the reason it is popular is that you can pretty much develop it in anything, it's beautiful tonality in Rodinal (tonality is the main reason to use B&W) with nice sharp well defined grain makes it a signature product.
You can process in Xtol and get slightly finer grain-its all good.

So the latest version is truly great and one you can use and buy with confidence as the limiting factor is the user.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

A few years ago Kodak moved all its film coating to a single new facility. At that time the formula for Tri-X (and also Plus-X) was changed to include several new technologies. This was the first significant change in Tri-X for quite some time. Kodak indicated this by changing the name of the film to 400TX. The film became finer grained, actually the finest grain 400 speed film available. So in reality old Tri-X is gone replaced by a better version named 400TX. Le roi est mort vivre le roi.

In all the subsequent years I cannot ever remember seeing a single thread, yea a single post from anyone asking why the name is different. This of course tells us something.

 

[Nathan King]

I hear people say that the new Tri-X grain is as fine as T-Max, but that has not been my experience. Focusing the enlarger for a small 6x enlargement is frustrating with T-Max because I can't see the grain in the magnifier! Tri-X remains "fine grained" up to an 8x enlargement where T-Max can go to 10x for the same grain size. Of course your experience may differ because of different developing routines.

Old Tri-x negatives look different (denser, perhaps) but the tones seem to print similarly, though the grain is much more controlled with the new formulation.

 

[Dali]

Of course your experience may differ because of different developing routines.

Or because having the grain visible or not is not that important.

As already said, Tri-X has a good tonality range, is somewhat forgiving to so-so exposure, is pretty versatile and react well with a huge majority of developers.

 

[GarageBoy]

Everyone waxes poetry about Tri X and cites reasons that they use it is because HCB used it and what not- all while buying the new and improved versions-
I get it, it's cool using the same materials as the ones made famous by your heros
I just feel that people always push Tri X/D76 1:1 without acknowledging that its NOT the same
Embrace technology- Tri X/Xtol is a beautiful combo
Hell, TMY-2 and Xtol is beautiful

 

[ColColt]

What I'm wondering about more so than grain structure is if I could use the same developers with the same times as I did with the old Tri-X. I don't know that I'll get back into darkroom work at this point or not but if I did it would be good to use what I'm use to instead of trying to work up yet another developer.

Who's making Tri-X now or rather, where is being made?

 

[GarageBoy]

Kodak in it's new (as of the mid 2000s) plant-
The times were changed when production moved, too check f-4017

 

[ColColt]

I thought Kodak had folded back around 3-4 years ago...went bankrupt or so the illustrious Internet exclaimed. If they're making it they're sure not selling it. Some company took over...Kodak Alaris or something to that effect, the production.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I thought Kodak had folded back around 3-4 years ago...went bankrupt or so the illustrious Internet exclaimed. If they're making it they're sure not selling it. Some company took over...Kodak Alaris or something to that effect, the production.

The following link may be informative.

http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/NewCo_Home_Top/About_Us/Frequently_Asked_Questions.htm

Everyone waxes poetry about Tri X and cites reasons that they use it is because HCB used it

HCB never used today's film. In fact Kodak probably made many incremental changes during HCB's lifetime and afterwards.

 

[ColColt]

According to that link there's no telling where that roll of Tri-X came from...seems a toss of the coin. I have no prolem purchasing a Canadian made Leitz lens but film from China I do.

Where are the manufacturing sites for the Kodak Alaris businesses? Major manufacturing locations include:

• Harrow, UK
• Shanghai, Xiamen and Wuxi, China
• Windsor, CO
• Manaus, Brazil
• Malanpour, India
• Pereslavl, Russia
• Rochester, NY