When I first was writing this, I thought, “oh, cool, I’ll use a bunch of Helmut Newton or maybe Avedon images”. But then I realized I have no idea which images of theirs are attributed to Kodak Tri-X film. Maybe they used Ilford, or Agfa.
However, with the exception of a couple I knew personally, such as the lighting director for Herb Ritts, or the few assistants I’ve known, I actually have no first hand knowledge. I suppose I can make educated guesses looking at the toe and contrast. But by the time it has been scanned so it’s digitally viewable, I have no idea. I knew this was going to be the most difficult category!
So, you’re stuck with images I actually took. As many are quite old, it is in no way self promotion. It’s just to show what’s typical in the ‘people realm’. I must confess that yellow and red filters were used in many. But, either way, it’s one of the films I’m happy are still available.
Kodak Tri-X Film – Very Malleable
The first shot is natural light, shot at 400iso. She’s putting on black lipstick, which is responsible for the “false” contrast.
Again, no filter was used, and only daylight. I guess you can say this is a typical Kodak Tri-X film output in terms of contrast when shot at it’s native 400 iso. Probably 1999.
Always Nice Contrast – High or Low
Contrast was increased with paper, not film. But I suppose you can call it a typical Tri-X output using strobes and red or yellow filter. I prefer to control contrast in the darkroom, but lenses used, filters used and the ambient scene will attribute to that contrast on the negative itself. All in all, Kodak Tri-X film has always come through in a pinch. Push it, pull it,…it always seems to behave well. I call it the “taffy of films”. Buying in bulk can save a lot of money. However, I’ve also used expired and have had no problems. But with that,…”you pays your money, and you takes your chances”. Find Kodak Tri-X