Thanks! I shoot more cubic than tabular, but am personally a fan of TMX and TMZ. TMZ, in particular. The tonality you mention is one reason; it also has great acutance. The results look like a slower film in Rodinal, but I can shoot at EI 3200....
Replies
I had way too many problems with blocked shadows and strange midtones with Tmx 100.
sep 1, 2025, 12:41 pm • 1 0 • view
Interesting. I haven't run into that. May be an issue of dialing in one's settings.
sep 1, 2025, 6:24 pm • 0 0 • view
Maybe, but I don’t have that many underexposures with TriX. I do street photography with 35 mm film & rarely have time to fine tune. Also, the “mushy” grain & that anti-halation dye —even when one thinks it’s washed out—leaves blotches. So, I use TMX for controlled scenes only.
sep 1, 2025, 7:14 pm • 0 0 • view
Tri-X is definitely more forgiving - TMX gets thin very quickly if underexposed. TMZ is less vulnerable to that, which is one reason that I find it more useful than the other T-Max films (though I do love TMX when it works). On a daily basis, I mostly shoot Kentmere or Aviphot - cheap and robust.
sep 1, 2025, 9:38 pm • 0 0 • view