What Film is this "Tri-X?"

[MikeT-NYC]

At a camera show a year ago, I got a bulk film loader full of what a note in pen on the loader called "Tri-X." But next to that is written "200/125" and above this, in pencil, is written "320" and "(400)"

So what speed is this film? Did Kodak ever make a version of 35mm Tri-X that was some speed other than 400? I got this last year at the 2024 Photo Historical Society of New England camera show, (and it must have been on their dollar table, because I already had three bulk loaders and wouldn't have bought another one for anything more than that).

But I'm assuming this film is still good, and I'm wondering if it really has a different speed (or if maybe this loader was owned by a camera club, and different people chose to use different speeds).

Here's a link to a photo of the label on the loader. (I described it above, because some people don't like to open links from strangers.)



BTW, the camera show i went to happens once a year and the 2025 show is NEXT SATURDAY. So if you live within driving distance of greater Boston and you like photography bargains, you should check it out. https://phsne.org/photographica/

 

[MattKing]

It could be movie film designed for reversal processing, but usable as a negative.
7266 is currently only available in 16mm and S8, but perhaps there once was a 5266?

 

[reddesert]

It could be anything, or it could be normal Tri-X where someone with different ideas about exposure wrote numbers on the loader. Take a few inches of film out (in a darkbag or darkroom, obviously), develop it, and look at the edge printing.

 

[Paul Howell]

From memory and my Kodak Data Guides Kodak TriX in 35mm has been 400. Plux X was 125, Double XX, 200 and Trix at 400. Professional Trix has been 320, might have been a 400 version in MF roll film. As Double X is still made as movie film and is rated at 200, TriX movie film I suspect would be 400. The odd ball would a areo version of Trix that might have at a lower ISO. My only guess is the number written on the can are someones personal E.I.

 

[MattKing]

TriX movie film I suspect would be 400

The 7266 Tr-X reversal film is ISO 200 for daylight, 160 for tungsten.
Of course, the label could have absolutely nothing to do with the contents.
Are you sure it is film in there? Can you develop an unexposed piece to check for edge markings?

 

[glbeas]

Possible someone derating the film due to age.

 

[Paul Howell]

The 7266 Tr-X reversal film is ISO 200 for daylight, 160 for tungsten.
Of course, the label could have absolutely nothing to do with the contents.
Are you sure it is film in there? Can you develop an unexposed piece to check for edge markings?

So it is an old version of movie film? As it the same ISO as Double X wonder why bother to make 2 movie films with the same ISO?

 

[chuckroast]

At a camera show a year ago, I got a bulk film loader full of what a note in pen on the loader called "Tri-X." But next to that is written "200/125" and above this, in pencil, is written "320" and "(400)"

So what speed is this film? Did Kodak ever make a version of 35mm Tri-X that was some speed other than 400? I got this last year at the 2024 Photo Historical Society of New England camera show, (and it must have been on their dollar table, because I already had three bulk loaders and wouldn't have bought another one for anything more than that).

But I'm assuming this film is still good, and I'm wondering if it really has a different speed (or if maybe this loader was owned by a camera club, and different people chose to use different speeds).

Here's a link to a photo of the label on the loader. (I described it above, because some people don't like to open links from strangers.)



BTW, the camera show i went to happens once a year and the 2025 show is NEXT SATURDAY. So if you live within driving distance of greater Boston and you like photography bargains, you should check it out. https://phsne.org/photographica/

Easy enough to find out what it is. Pull out 8-12 inches of film, put it on a reel, rinse well and then stick it in fixer until it clears. Wash briefly, then look at the edges. It should tell you something about what flavor of film this is.

 

[pentaxuser]

Or the person from whom you obtained it was hoping that his notes on the can would prompt you to raise it on Photrio as we are often short of things to talk about

Seriously there is no way for any of us to know what the notes pertain to but chuckroast has given you a solution to finding out if it was references to the film's speed or even if it is Tri-X if you develop then fix it

pentaxuser

 

[Don_ih]

Pull out 8-12 inches of film, put it on a reel, rinse well and then stick it in fixer until it clears. Wash briefly, then look at the edges. It should tell you something about what flavor of film this is.

Needs to be developed before being fixed or it'll just be clear.

Best idea is expose a strip at 25, 50, 100, 200, develop as though it's trix. See what looks best. It'll probably all look terrible. TriX ages like a full diaper.

 

[chuckroast]

Needs to be developed before being fixed or it'll just be clear.

Best idea is expose a strip at 25, 50, 100, 200, develop as though it's trix. See what looks best. It'll probably all look terrible. TriX ages like a full diaper.

Now I have to go try this. I thought the edge markings showed up after just fixing. Interesting.

 

[Don_ih]

Now I have to go try this. I thought the edge markings showed up after just fixing. Interesting.

The edge markings are written on the film with light and so show up in developer. Very old film can have them somewhat faded. I have an old roll of PanF 50 that has nearly invisible numbers.

 

[MattKing]

Now I have to go try this. I thought the edge markings showed up after just fixing. Interesting.

Edge markings are made by exposing the normal film emulsion that goes out to the edges to light. That is done in a couple of different ways - stenciled characters, "writing with light", but they aren't fundamentally different than the rest of the image.

 

[chuckroast]

The edge markings are written on the film with light and so show up in developer. Very old film can have them somewhat faded. I have an old roll of PanF 50 that has nearly invisible numbers.

Gotcha. I never really thought about it before.

 

[MattKing]

Don and I actually seem to be on a roll and are agreeing on things - I knew he would come around

 

[chuckroast]

Needs to be developed before being fixed or it'll just be clear.

Best idea is expose a strip at 25, 50, 100, 200, develop as though it's trix. See what looks best. It'll probably all look terrible. TriX ages like a full diaper.

I have had very good luck with old Tri-X - as old as the late 1970s - using standing development. There is some fog, but not enough to get in the way of a good print.

 

[chuckroast]

Don and I actually seem to be on a roll and are agreeing on things - I knew he would come around

Must be the impending apocalypse or something ...

 

[mshchem]

The 200/125 are prices. $2.00 for 36 exp, $1.25 for 20 exp. The 400 and 320 are daylight and tungsten speeds.

SWAG YMMV LMAO ..... "Dr. Science, he's got a masters degree, in science"

 

[Don_ih]

I have had very good luck with old Tri-X - as old as the late 1970s - using standing development. There is some fog, but not enough to get in the way of a good print.

That's good. The best developer I found for very old TriX was Rodinal. Any developer with Metol in it is to be avoided.

 

[Donald Qualls]

stick it in fixer until it clears. Wash briefly, then look at the edges.

Edge markings only become visible after development. What is the OP supposed to see in the edges? Perforation type?

I would point out that Tri-X Reversal is about the same speed as Double-X Negative in motion picture film -- and I believe it was sold in 35 mm when there were a few amateur 35 mm movie cameras around, but if so, it was a long time ago.

I'd also speculate that the array of different speeds written on the loader are from different film loadings and the user felt confident in needing only that little reminder for what had been loaded last. I agree that 320 Tri-X was never sold in 35 mm, but it might be that a user was downrating their film 1/3 stop to compensate for a speed-losing developer.

 

[loccdor]

I thought I saw an ad the other day where Tri-X was 200 speed when it first came out.

But what this looks like (due to 400 and 320 written) is someone cutting the speed in half due to age. The second number may be the tungsten rating. Or a rating for cloudy vs. daylight.

I wouldn't pay much attention to it, it looks old so it would need testing.

 

[chuckroast]

I thought I saw an ad the other day where Tri-X was 200 speed when it first came out.

But what this looks like (due to 400 and 320 written) is someone cutting the speed in half due to age. The second number may be the tungsten rating. Or a rating for cloudy vs. daylight.

I wouldn't pay much attention to it, it looks old so it would need testing.

This has been widely discussed here, but the manner in which film speed was measured changed in 1960. This had the effect having box speed double using the new standard. Tri-X went from ASA 200 to ASA 400 overnight. The film didn't change. The standard of measurement did.

See:

Film speed - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

That said, Tri-X has gone through multiple iterations of its formulation over the many years that it has existed. I am reasonably sure that 35mm Tri-X is different today than it was in 1960 and I'm certain it is different than the older 120 and sheet film variants of TXP, with only the sheet films being made in version if TXP today ... and that may well be different than 1960s TXP

 

[Ian Grant]

I posted in another thread a 1960 Kodak Ltd Professional catalogue mentions Royal-X had been revised t 1600 ASA Daylight, 1250 ASA Tungsten.

This was just before the overall ASA/BS speed revisions, and the catalogue states the safety fact had been removed for Royal-X. The same catalogue lists Tri-X as 200 ASA Daylight, 125 ASA Tungsten.

There were no similar revisions of the DIN speeds.

Ian

 

[loccdor]

@chuckroast These are all from the same 1971 advertisement posted in this thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/freestyle-ad-1971.213297/

Tri-X 35mm at 320 ASA, Tri-X 70mm at 400 ASA, and Tri-X 5 1/4 inch rolls at 200 ASA.

 

[loccdor]

TriX ages like a full diaper.

That has been my experience as well. After 10 years the grain was huge.