Response to Tri-X or HP5+ ?

I just recently finished testing most major films and plotting HD curves when developed in PMK. I've also investigated the claim that you can get more speed using D-76 or Xtol. Here's the skinny on these two films (35 mm): TX-135 has a real speed of 250, and no more. HP-5+ has a real speed of 400. Actually, really 400! The curve of Tri-X has a long toe and shoulders off rapidly; this is what gives the perception of 'exposure latitued,' a bogus concept. Such a film will allow a 'useable image' under nearly all situations, but will not produce a negative that will make a stunning print without LOTS of work. HP-5+, not only meets its claimed speed of 400, but had a curve that is ruler flat from Zone II to Zone IX! (Developed in PMK for 14 1/2 minutes @68F.) The base fog is almost non-existant in 120 and sheet formats, and only 0.36 in 35mm. Grain is quite good for a 400 speed film. Those seeking better grain with Tri-X should consider Delta 400. TXP (the 'pro' version) has a speed of 320 and is quite a nice film, but HP-5+ is still better, and 2/3 stop faster. Regarding 'increased' film speed with D-76: BUNK! Sure you can get the Zone I point at the rated speed, but the negative must be printed down to show detail in the highlight areas and this causes the shadows to 'dump.' I measured the shadow area (Zone III in the negative) as a Zone I in the print when Zone VIII was printed as Zone VIII! Hardly a useful speed increase!

[ Previous | Next ]