Xtol is massaging the grain a lot.. Edwal 12 is not far behind.
View attachment 61536
Edwal 12 has always been an interesting developer because it is fairly unique in its aim to produce extra-fine grain (lots of solvent action from both sulfite and PPD) with snappy contrast, so that you don't need to "overdevelop" for snap, which would otherwise destroy its extra fine grain properties. That differentiates it somewhat from the typical extra-fine grain D-23 variants like Microdol/Perceptol etc.
.. Skill, subject, and circumstance have far more to do with how a photo looks than grain structure or characteristic curve.
Read the 1st post and note that its a technical thread posted in Darkroom -> B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry....
Crystallography, Chemistry and how Kodak tweaked (several times) a classic film like Tri-X is on topic.
I would characterize Edwal 12 to have finer grain than Xtol, even, and it's very sharp.
Right, what does 'better' mean anyway? 'Technically better' usually means 'boring' to me. You know, resolution and all that. Yawn. In the end it's just the opinion of one photographer, and why should we care what Steve Anchell's tastes are? It's up to us to decide for ourselves what we like, what suits our work flow, and what helps us express ourselves in the most optimal way.
Well, I didn't wrote 'better' or 'Technically better' or mentioned resolution, hence its hard to answer Your question.
The OP asked about what Steve Anchell wrote about Tri-X and Tmax.. not what Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt think about Tri-X.
Yes, exactly. Those were my words.
I don't care what Steve Anchell says, is another way of putting it...
It's all about the print, Mark. What else is there? Paper + developer has certain tonal characteristics, and if we don't learn how to work with our materials to fit those characteristics, then we miss a massive awful lot of potential. Trying to wrestle paper around negative characteristics is a huge compromise.
Thank you for the kind words, by the way. I have a great deal of respect for you.
All film are exactly the same. Here's how you prove it: smear vaseline over your enlarger lens, make
a print, crumple it up, then rephotograph it with your cell phone camera, then post it in a low res
JPEQ for a 2 inch square web evaluation. Scientific objectivity perfected! Also helps if you smear
vaseline over your own eyeballs.
Read the 1st post and note that its a technical thread posted in Darkroom -> B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry....
Crystallography, Chemistry and how Kodak tweaked (several times) a classic film like Tri-X is on topic.
Regardless, the toe with any of these is considerably
less than with Tri-X, i.e., always higher contrast in the toe with either TMax film.
I noticed the same in limited shooting with new T-Max 400. This characteristic, as a starting point for me, suggests I rate new -135 T-Max 400 at 320, use no light yellow filter, and gain speed for indoor portraits. Those small format images are likely to have a MF smooth look in 5x7 prints. I gain a stop on Tri-X and retain shadow contrast; at least I hope.
Works for me too and it starts at the original scene. Imagine the desired outcome and think like the paper. That guides everything from camera filters to exposure, developer/development routine and on and on to the final print.
Edwal 12 has always been an interesting developer because it is fairly unique in its aim to produce extra-fine grain (lots of solvent action from both sulfite and PPD) with snappy contrast, so that you don't need to "overdevelop" for snap, which would otherwise destroy its extra fine grain properties. That differentiates it somewhat from the typical extra-fine grain D-23 variants like Microdol/Perceptol etc.
Where do you get Edwal 12? Neither Freestyle nor Adorama nor B&H have it. Photographer's Formulary has something they say is the same, but it's pretty expensive - $15 a liter with a claimed shelf life of 2 months. I did find a mix it yourself formula on Digital Truth.
Yeah, and I see 1 litre is $14.95 while 2 is only $19.95
OTOH, I rarely shoot black and white in 35mm anymore and, when I do, it's usually in low light with TMZ, soon to be D3200. Grain isn't much of an issue for my medium format and not at all for my 4x5, so I'm not sure I need to experiment with yet another developer. But it's good to know anyway.
That Edwal 12 seems excellent. Never tried. I think I'm going to
When TMX & TMY came out I tried, didn't like it at all and it was over. I kept shooting TRI-X / TXP till now.
It is a given that with proper test and with use you get excellent results with TM. And match as seen on Thomas examples the 2 film for printing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?