ily tri-x
10/12/2019
When it comes to film photography, I feel like everybody's got a stock that they love and adore. The kind of passion for an emulsion that drives them to hoard in bulk to ensure there's always a spare box in the freezer and one in their pocket. At the moment, my love happens to be for Kodak Tri-X 400 (in fact, there are ten rolls of it coming my way!) Tri-X has an undisputed legacy since its 135mm debut in 1954 and I remember the worldwide panic that ensued at the notion of losing this film stock after Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 2012.
Thankfully, Kodak never ceased production of its Tri-X film and it's safe to say that it remains one of the most popular black and white film stocks to this day.
When it comes to film photography, I feel like everybody's got a stock that they love and adore. The kind of passion for an emulsion that drives them to hoard in bulk to ensure there's always a spare box in the freezer and one in their pocket. At the moment, my love happens to be for Kodak Tri-X 400 (in fact, there are ten rolls of it coming my way!) Tri-X has an undisputed legacy since its 135mm debut in 1954 and I remember the worldwide panic that ensued at the notion of losing this film stock after Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 2012.
Thankfully, Kodak never ceased production of its Tri-X film and it's safe to say that it remains one of the most popular black and white film stocks to this day.
What drives me towards Tri-X is its latitude, grain structure, and contrast when pushed. I like a photo that has some "punch", deep blacks while still retaining my highlights. I've flirted with other professional b/w films before, but have found that Tri-X gives me the results most similar to how I would edit a photo.
To achieve my "look" with Tri-X, I tend to overexpose my shot and push my development a stop. This means I often rate my film at either 200 or box speed, then develop it as an 800-speed film. This is a trick I learned from a blog post written by Johnny Patience, in which you take advantage of the latitude of modern-day film formula to achieve perfectly exposed, dense negatives.
As Mr. Patience succinctly states in his method:
"... overexposure compresses the contrast range of a negative while it significantly opens up the tonal range."
To achieve my "look" with Tri-X, I tend to overexpose my shot and push my development a stop. This means I often rate my film at either 200 or box speed, then develop it as an 800-speed film. This is a trick I learned from a blog post written by Johnny Patience, in which you take advantage of the latitude of modern-day film formula to achieve perfectly exposed, dense negatives.
As Mr. Patience succinctly states in his method:
"... overexposure compresses the contrast range of a negative while it significantly opens up the tonal range."
And my oh my, does this method deliver tonal range.
Not only does it deliver the crunchy blacks that I go for, but it also flourishes every gritty shade of gray along the way as it transitions into my whites. This complements my workflow very well as this allows me to spend less time on editing and more time on creating these posts! This overexposure, overdevelop strategy works for every type of black and white film and is actually the main reason why I have stuck with primarily film and Tri-X all these years. Film possesses such a wide latitude that, unlike digital, I rarely have to worry about blowing out my highlights when my exposure is off.
Not only does it deliver the crunchy blacks that I go for, but it also flourishes every gritty shade of gray along the way as it transitions into my whites. This complements my workflow very well as this allows me to spend less time on editing and more time on creating these posts! This overexposure, overdevelop strategy works for every type of black and white film and is actually the main reason why I have stuck with primarily film and Tri-X all these years. Film possesses such a wide latitude that, unlike digital, I rarely have to worry about blowing out my highlights when my exposure is off.
Kodak Tri-X 400 has been a staple in my venture into photography and I'd be hard-pressed to change that anytime soon. But, it is important to note that Tri-X is not without its quirks and there are definitely alternatives out there. For those who want to preserve the best of shadow details and have easy-to-scan negatives, I would suggest Tri-X's main competitor: Ilford HP5 Plus.
Ilford HP5 tends to produce a flatter image, allowing for retention of even the subtlest of tones, while Tri-X will happily crush your blacks in high contrast lighting. As for easy-to-scan negatives, Tri-X can curl up quite a bit after development, while HP5 dries as flat and straight as a ruler. For anyone who does scanning at home, this is a godsend as HP5 is easier to scan without fear of distortion.
That being said though, there's a good reason why I still love and shoot Tri-X. It's a beaut in image quality and as versatile as a towel. You'd have to pry it out of my cold, dead hands before I stop shooting it.
Wow, this post might be the longest one I've written yet. Until next time!
-kdo
Ilford HP5 tends to produce a flatter image, allowing for retention of even the subtlest of tones, while Tri-X will happily crush your blacks in high contrast lighting. As for easy-to-scan negatives, Tri-X can curl up quite a bit after development, while HP5 dries as flat and straight as a ruler. For anyone who does scanning at home, this is a godsend as HP5 is easier to scan without fear of distortion.
That being said though, there's a good reason why I still love and shoot Tri-X. It's a beaut in image quality and as versatile as a towel. You'd have to pry it out of my cold, dead hands before I stop shooting it.
Wow, this post might be the longest one I've written yet. Until next time!
-kdo
