A-Hah! - Shooting Kodak Tri-X once again.
In 2020 when I started shooting black and white film again there was quite a big difference in price here in the US between Kodak Tri-X and films like Fomapan 400 and Kentmere 400. I know prices on different film stocks vary from country to country around the world but at the time films like Fomapan 400 were considered a budget alternative to films like Ilford HP5 and Kodak Tri-X. As much as 3 or 4 dollars less per 36 exposure roll. Kodak Tri-X being one of the more expensive black and white films at the time.
Price wise can Fomapan 400 now compete with films like Tri-X and HP5 here in the US?
It's now January 2025 and here in the US the once budget priced Foma brand films like Foamapan 400 have risen to as much as $8.50 per roll and for some miraculous reason Kodak Tri-X has come down from around $11.00 as of a year and half ago to $8.99 per 36 exposure roll. Making it a bit harder to call Fomapan 400 a budget film these days. So now I have to ask myself, is it time to start shooting Tri-X? A film that I have not shot since the mid 1970's which now has a price point similar to Ilford HP5 and the now once budget minded Foamapn 400.
|
| Fomapan 400 shot at 400 ISO |
|
| Kodak Tri-X shot at 800 ISO |
That brings me to my latest video, questioning just that. Is Kodak Tri-X and films like Ilford HP5 now an alternative to the once budget oriented Fomapan 400 ( a film that I am pretty fond of ) and will it still have a place in my repertoire of capturing images on black and white film? Click on the link below as I delve deeper into that very question regarding this once budget oriented film vs one of the most classic 35mm black and white films of all time.
Click on the link above to check out my latest YouTube video and once again thank so much for visiting my blog :-)