neopan 400 vs. tri-x 400? : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

I'm a college student who's been in and out of the darkroom for about 6 years. Right now I'm shooting for a portfolio to enter for a juried exhibition--mostly outdoor stuff, with some indoor/low lighting and maybe a few nighttime shots. The enlargement size will (only!) be 8x10.

I used Neopan 400 for a project last year under recommendation from my prof, but "pull" developed it at 200. I was making 11x14s at the largest, and they were somewhat grainy but in a nice way--so, I've never used it at it's true 400 speed. I've also used tri-x 400 for a class.

Has anybody used both of these specific films who could give me some direct comparisons? I've read some of the reviews at, but they don't always compare them directly against one another. I want to do the best I can with this project but don't want to start completely from scratch comparing them because 1) I don't have the darkroom time, and 2) some of these photo situations can't be reproduced!

Any advice would be greatly appreciated! By the way, I tend to like contrasty prints (but not sacrificing all shadow detail!) and I'll likely use Ilford Multigrade IV fiber paper.


-- keri (, December 21, 2000


I'd say go with the film you're most familiar with - in your case, Neopan. However, take the time to set up an experiment that provides a wide contrast range and shoot it with a roll, or even a partial roll, of Tri-X and Neopan. Process both according to mfrs' instructions and compare. Tnis shouldn't take more than a couple days at most and might reassure you in whatever you do. I've shot with both films mixed and when it comes to printing, I can't tell which is which without reading the edge of the film.

-- Keith Nichols (, December 21, 2000.

hi I have been using neopan 1600 and 400 for some time I feel if the situations can not be reproduced, you better go with neopan 400 or even neopan 1600 as for 8x10 the grain won't be a big deal also, if you are shooting in low lighting, grain will probably add a punch to the picture as you said you have very lesss darkroom time here are some tech details: for neopan 1600 or 400 without a pull: D76 1:1 for 14 min @ 18 degree C

thanks shreepad

-- shreepad (, January 01, 2001.

I normally use tri-x, but was forced to use the fuji 400 recently and found it to be excessively grainy. My usual dev is Paterson Aculux, tri-x is grainy too, but more under control

-- jim walters (, February 02, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ