Tri-x 400 examples

I exposed at 400 speed
http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/?

This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail on
what I think is a filled in doorway.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm R.Schenck wrote:

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

There is a large area on top of the doorway which is a uniform white,
but this is not due to overexposure but is caused either by the
way the negative has been printed or the way the picture has been
scanned. It takes a huge amount of exposure before you lose highlight
contrast, and even then you wouldn't wind up with zero contrast
in the highlights. I can absolutely guarantee that the pure white
parts of the image show detail on the negative.

If I were printing this in the darkroom, I would burn-in the highlights
using a piece of card with a hole in it. This would bring out the
texture in the highlights. Are these pictures scanned from prints that
someone else has made, or are they from a negative scanner?

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

Exposing at the rated speed of B&W negative film results
in the shortest exposures for scenes of average contrast from
which excellent prints can be made. Your pictures are mostly of
average to moderately high contrast scenes, and I would be inclined
to meter based on the shadow areas. If you are metering the
average of the scene, then I would be inclined to derate the
film by a stop. Many people shoot tri-X at 200 and get excellent
results.

Peter.
--

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm R.Schenck wrote:

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

There is a large area on top of the doorway which is a uniform white,
but this is not due to overexposure but is caused either by the
way the negative has been printed or the way the picture has been
scanned. It takes a huge amount of exposure before you lose highlight
contrast, and even then you wouldn't wind up with zero contrast
in the highlights. I can absolutely guarantee that the pure white
parts of the image show detail on the negative.

If I were printing this in the darkroom, I would burn-in the highlights
using a piece of card with a hole in it. This would bring out the
texture in the highlights. Are these pictures scanned from prints that
someone else has made, or are they from a negative scanner?

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

Exposing at the rated speed of B&W negative film results
in the shortest exposures for scenes of average contrast from
which excellent prints can be made. Your pictures are mostly of
average to moderately high contrast scenes, and I would be inclined
to meter based on the shadow areas. If you are metering the
average of the scene, then I would be inclined to derate the
film by a stop. Many people shoot tri-X at 200 and get excellent
results.

Peter.
--

R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

there appears to be a lot of missing texture at the top of the crypt,
especially in the base of the statue which shows as a solid white block.

I doubt you're overexposing, but rather overprinting or having scanning
problems. are you scanning the negative directly or scanning from a
print?

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

yes, depending on development.

check the negative; if you don't see texture in the statue base, I'd
examine your development process.
--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." |
The United States is the one true country. The US is just. The US
is fair. The US respects its citizens. The US loves you. We have
always been at war against terrorism.

R.Schenck wrote:
I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

there appears to be a lot of missing texture at the top of the crypt,
especially in the base of the statue which shows as a solid white block.

I doubt you're overexposing, but rather overprinting or having scanning
problems. are you scanning the negative directly or scanning from a
print?

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

yes, depending on development.

check the negative; if you don't see texture in the statue base, I'd
examine your development process.
--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." |
The United States is the one true country. The US is just. The US
is fair. The US respects its citizens. The US loves you. We have
always been at war against terrorism.

"R.Schenck" wrote in message
...
I exposed at 400 speed
http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/?

This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail
on
what I think is a filled in doorway.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group


To me, they look like the paper grade is too high, or they've
been overdeveloped a little. Labs usually go with a lot more contrast than
I do, but that's the opinion of the wolds worst scanner. That would be me.
I usually expose Tri-X @ 200, D76 1:1 is a very easy to use developer,
although I like Rodinal when I can get it. It's necessary to find your own
standard everything. Don't be afraid to bracket a few shots and bracket
developement. The results will pay off in the future. I find that way too
much contrast makes better scans, but I develop for prints, so there's the
tradeoff. Bob Hickey

"R.Schenck" wrote in message
...
I exposed at 400 speed
http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/?

This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more detail
on
what I think is a filled in doorway.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is the
usual no?

Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group


To me, they look like the paper grade is too high, or they've
been overdeveloped a little. Labs usually go with a lot more contrast than
I do, but that's the opinion of the wolds worst scanner. That would be me.
I usually expose Tri-X @ 200, D76 1:1 is a very easy to use developer,
although I like Rodinal when I can get it. It's necessary to find your own
standard everything. Don't be afraid to bracket a few shots and bracket
developement. The results will pay off in the future. I find that way too
much contrast makes better scans, but I develop for prints, so there's the
tradeoff. Bob Hickey

I just wanted to respond to multiple posters at once. Thanks for all
the replies.

I had the film developed at a 'pro' shop nearby, the images on-line are
what came on the photo-cd that they also made, so I'd think that they
are scanned from negatives.

I have no darkroom nor ability to develop film and process prints on my
own and usually go to a 'market' type developer with my color film.
I've had problems getting them to develop anything 'pushed' in one
direction or another so will probably go to a pro-shop to develope
anything I do that with in the future.

R.Schenck wrote:
I exposed at 400 speed
http://photobucket.com/albums/y13/Nygdan/Boston%20BnW/?

This one seems like perhaps it could'vebeen sharper, to have more
detail on
what I think is a filled in doorway.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-04A.jpg

I rather like this one, I didn't realize that it was a bit over
exposed
when I had first gotten the print, but now that i've had at least
some
experience with this sort of thing its rather obvious

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y13...oll1DX-02A.jpg

Should this t-x 400 be exposed at some other speed perhaps, 400 is
the
usual no?

Any criticisms of the photos would be appreciated from either group

It is utterly pointless to try to do B&W work unless you process and
print the film yourself. This is a complete waste of time!

R.Schenck wrote:

I seriously resent you linking to a site with pop-ups.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.