Tri x looks the winner but I imagine you could get them almost identical in Lightroom or darkroom?

The coincidence of you uploading this is almost eerie, I was literally researching about the differences between Ilford HP5 and Tri-X for 120 film two hours ago. Nice work.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Glad I could help 😃

I like the HP5 images. They look like they have more of a fuller tonal range. I can always give more contrast in post but I cannot create more tones. Good video!

@efdesilva

3 жыл бұрын

This is what I am thinking about since I just set up my darkroom...contrast filters!

Excellent video! Oh, wow. The first thing that shocked me, is that the Tri-X photos hit home as looking exactly as I remember shooting that film when I was a high school boy, and could process and print black and white at home. I really love the shocking contrast, and the way it gives that look that the outstanding photo journalists captured back in the day with their Nikon F and F3's. The HP5 struck me as looking exactly as I remember Kodak Plus-X Pan 125 film that I shot in the day! No wonder Ilford puts the "Plus" in the name. If I was photographing friends or family and wanted a softer image, HP5 would be the obvious choice. The kind of family stuff Matt Day makes. But, me, I would shoot Portra 400 color for that. The Tri-X contrast and that '60's photo journalism look straight from the scan, without a lot of processing, would make me want to shoot that film if I was going to shoot black and white at all.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏 I adjusted the white and black point in Lightroom. I may add more contrast before I print these photos to give them more punch.

Thanks for the video Steve, looks a very interesting day. For me I preferred your shots on Tri-X as I love the added punch & contrast. Tri-X has that classic look straight up!

@richardsimms251

3 жыл бұрын

Wonderful video RS

@chesslover8829

Жыл бұрын

While the images were close, I liked the Tri-X pictures a little better. The Tri-X photos had a little more contrast over all, better adjacent contrast, and a little more atmosphere than the HP5 film. In bright sunlight, HP5 might hold the highlights a little better.

Lovely content Steven, thanks for sharing your photo adventures with us all.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Darren, I’m glad you enjoy them.

the shots of the bridge are my favorites from this video :) thanks for sharing!

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏

Seriously though, I found it to be about half and half. The bridge of the river was Tri-X but the mine gate was HP5. Again, about half and half.

As a HP5 fan for years I have to say to my eyes triX kicked ass here more contrast more detail HP5 looked a bit muddy. I’ll still use HP5 but I’ll give TriX another look. Congrats on the subs well deserved 📷❤️

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks mate

Nice work Stephen, those are my two favourite films. Have a tendency to lean toward the HP5 myself but nice to see a local comparison.

It has been a long time since I used TriX, and I no longer have a wet darkroom. For a hybrid process, I prefer the HP5+. It is much easier to manipulate contrast in post digitally. Having said that, a while ago I was going through my old 4X5 negatives and the most striking ones were shot on the old TriX Pan in the early mid 80s.

Tri-X definitely showing more contrast at box speed. Nearly 2k subs now too 👍

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Jarred. Exciting times ahead.

Very well-done, professional video, Stephen. The Tri-X wins hands down, IMHO. Also, I learned to use the pre-release switch on my Hassey. Cheers!

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏 Is the pre release the same as shutter lock up?

@IsraelPrivateGuide

3 жыл бұрын

@@StephenMilner Yes, it is. It also closes the shutter to the preset aperture.

Trix is timeless...rich blacks and so contrasty and just the right amount of grain. I shoot mostly hp5 for long exposure because the data seems to be more reliable for reciprocity than kodaks. Also hp5 is a great digital post processing film. Just my two cents.

Comparing those two films shows that a photographer needs to have a knowledge of the film that is being used, needs to have the final image envisioned already in order to use the right film in the given moment. Kodak is clearly more contrasty and gives more punchy photos while Ilford retains more details in shadows. I see Kodak Tri-X 400 as a landscape film (when used on a bright sunny day) and when I saw photos done with Ilford HP5 Plus, I thought that it would have been a great film for B&W portraits (it is only my opinion). Great video, keep the great work and maybe put to a test some of the less pricy films like Fomapan 100 against Kodak Tri-X or similar one (that would have been interesting to see such comparison).

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏

I agree with Andrew Sillar, Tri-X is generally brighter and punchier but not in all cases. I wonder if the compensation for RF was not enough for the Tri-X as those (if I remember correctly) tended to brighten the HP5 more than the Tri-X.

Tri-x has a steeper curve in this comparison with HP5 and in my experience (years), I've always preferred Tri-x for its contrast. For me, HP5 has always been flatter. I don't know how you processed the film and the developer used, but that can make a difference too (obviously) :-). Thanks.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks. They were developed my lab (PCL) in Auckland on the same day. I’m not sure what developer they use and there was no adjustment to the developing time.

When I looked at the images one by one I thought "well they're no that interesting", but I had the feeling that I was missing something, so I watched the video again and paid more attention to the images rather than the film comparison. I really liked the fact that you have been able to create a great story about the place and shared its atmosphere throughout the set of images. Film wise, I like HP5 a tad more because it's cheaper in the UK and gives a nice, flat bnw that I can tweak later on in post. It was my go-to choice when shooting black and white.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏 people say I have a minimal style. I realise that’s not for everyone. I’m glad you liked the story. My next video is of another gold mine that has a working steam plant.

There is certainly a lot of love for HP5 in the world, and for good reason. Your video provides great insight for anyone wanting to see how the two differ. I must say that I have had better success overall with Tri-X myself, for creating images that please my eye at least. HP5 always tends to look a bit too flat to me. In more recent years I tend to push it and that has delivered better outcomes for me. I've seen a lot of great HP5 images, and oftentimes I discover they were pushed a stop or two. I find Tri-X delivers best in scenes where there is not strong direct light and your side-by-side comparisons shows this, though to the average person (un trained eye etc) there is little difference I suspect. When it comes to 400 speed film, Tri-X is generally preferred for me, though I tend to reach for Ilford Delta 400 increasingly too as I tend to use that on those brighter days where I find Tri-X just a bit too contrasty.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment Ted. I’m yet experiment with pushing and pulling film. I need to learn how to develop my own film first.

@tedsmith_photography

3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Milner it’s very freeing creatively to develop your own film. It’s quicker and cheaper too once you have the basic kit (changing bag and a tank and the chemicals; I use Ilford DDX developer, and their fixer and stop). I can shoot a roll at 10:00 and have it developed, dried and scanned by 18:00. I highly recommend it chap.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the tips mate

It depends on your purposes, Tri-X is more suitable for reportage/street in which you need the contrast. The Hp5 is the classic flat vintage black and white film that never ends. For my taste I prefer Hp5.

Tri-x for me every time

I like the HP5 more. Look less contrasty.

Just got yourself another subscriber.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you, I’m really glad you have joined the group.

interesting comparison ... looks like the Tri-X has more contrast with less tonal range assuming they had equivalent development in the tank

@nevilleholmes1324

2 жыл бұрын

Tri-X typically requires less development time than HP5+. If both were sent to a lab for processing then it was possible that they were given the same development time hence Tr-X would tend to be contrasty compaired with HP5. There is a subtle differrence between these films but I suspect the differences seen are more to do with the development or PP than inherent in the film. I only use HP5 due to UK cost and also how well you can abuse HP5+ and get good results.

@chesslover8829

Жыл бұрын

​@nevilleholmes1324 I think you're right, and I like your theory regarding development.

I am not a HP5 fan. Much preferring TRI-X 400 for the contrast and grain. Even TMAX 400 has better contrast. HP5 to me eyes is just muddy. But you did it justice

@nathanpiperphoto

11 ай бұрын

Agreed. I've shot it at box speed and a lot of images at box speed just end up being a blob of grey with zero contrast and lackluster acutance, but still grainy. Pushing it to 800 or 1600 ISO to try and get more contrast and you can often get really over-exaggerated grain that can effects the detail of the image far beyond what you'd expect just based on the film's popularity for being pushed. 400TX + TMAX 400 are just more dependable stocks that you can rely on to get similar results each exposure, pushing or not.

@garywebb5912

Ай бұрын

HP5 gives a flatter negative that allows for greater lattitude in processing to my mind. I originally found the film too flat also but it’s really grown on me lately and it seems easy to get the Tri-X contrast out of, but seems to have better tonality and shadow detail. In my view anyway.

This is a bit off-topic but your Fstop bag makes several appearances so I thought I’d ask about its comfort. Most camera backpacks sit relatively low compared to hiking packs and often exert a significant backwards pull when loaded, at least that has been my experience. Can you comment on this bag’s comfort after wearing it for several hours? Thanks! Really like your work and vlog.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I have the Tilopa and the Shinn. It depends on the weight in the bag. In my experience, the Tilopa is good for one or two days. Anything more, the extra padding on the Shinn is more comfortable.

Did you do any sharpening in post? How sharp do you consider the 50mm cfi lens? I recently acquired this camera with the 50 cfi and looking forward to using it. Do you use your camera handheld at all? Btw I really enjoy the way you compose, your observation of lines makes for pleasant images. The railroad image with the wheelbarrow is great.

@StephenMilner

Жыл бұрын

Thank you. It’s sharp but not as sharp as the Mamiya 7 50mm lens. I always add selective sharpening during post.

Personally prefer Tri-X at a box speed over Ilford, but if pushed, hands down i go for HP5 anytime (ISO 1600 in medium format is a sweet spot to me). Also to my humble experience HP5 is a safer choice for portraiture. And yes, where i live, Ilford is available at a lower price;)

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your tips.

Nice content but why use a Polariser in these conditions?

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks. To remove glare and increase contrast.

Both have different things going for and against them. Would be great if a film had the blend of both oh wait Fujifilm Acros.

Hello, may I ask how you set the filter on your Hasselblad Is it possible to buy this adapter in New Zealand?

@shaunyao3119

3 жыл бұрын

@@alexanderpopov4691 You might comment at the wrong place :)

@alexanderpopov4691

3 жыл бұрын

@@shaunyao3119 Beg pardon, my bad.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Check out the description section of my video where you will find links to the adapters.

Awesome content, instant sub. Only problem is the extreme amount of ads. Definitely more than usual, and annoyingly in the middle of the video.

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙏 If you have any ideas for generating income in another way I’d love to hear about it??

Love you for what you doing, hate you for what you done... overall 👍

@StephenMilner

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks, I think??

@shootsan

3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Milner... I hate, means excellent to me 👍 thanks for videos, great contribution for film.

Looks like the HP-5+ is inherently a bit faster than Tri-X, but here Tri-X is being developed to a higher contrast. I'm unclear as to the function of the polarizer here, as the sky is overcast and there seems no need to control polarzed reflections.

As much as I love TriX its almost impossible to get regularly and so I always get HP5 and learnt to manipulate by developing differently based on needs, Kodak is a dumb company that continually shoots itself in the foot. Cannot be trusted to make regular supplies.

@nathanpiperphoto

11 ай бұрын

It's easy to hate on Kodak, but it was Ilford who recently couldn't figure out why it had bottled so many film rolls with spots/mottle issues for years. Probably tons of defective Ilford film still out there on the market. You can complain about their prices, supply of film, or methods of business, but Kodak film dependability has not been a recent issue and you certainly get what you pay for with them, which is good results.

@stewartweir3425

11 ай бұрын

@@nathanpiperphoto You have some great points yet it remains a fact that Kodak film is a rarity far too often