FP4+ To Tri-X Comparison
This is a comparison of FP4+ to Tri-X. I chose Tri-X to serve as a general measuring stick to other films simply because of it’s wide popularity, I do not think it is a superior film to any other. All films in this series were exposed at box speed, processed in D-76 stock for the manufacturer’s published times, then printed to the same contrast and time. The purpose is to see if there are any differences and what they might be, not to name one film better than another. In this specific comparison, both performed well at box speed and had a full range of tones when processed in this basic manner. Tri-X displayed more grain, as expected of a faster film, but the mid tones separated differently between films, though overall contrast range was the same. Channel Merch, Discord, and more: https://linktr.ee/The_Naked_Photographer Music by Hooksounds: https://www.hooksounds.com/ref/thenak... Join this channel to get access to perks: / @thenakedphotographer

Fp4 + vs Delta100: A Head-to-head Comparison

Tri-X to HP5+ Comparison

Top 5 Reasons Your Film Photos Look Bad or Underwhelming

Comparing Rodinal, HC110 & Xtol

Kentmere Pan 200 - A glowing endorsement

What has happened in the film Photography Industry?

Pan F+ to Tri-X Comparison

The Film Stock I used the most in 2025 | IFLORD FP4+

Why Black & White Prints Fall Flat (Fixes!)

Ilford FP4+ 125 ISO Black And White Film | All About Film

More about Metering - Incident Meters, Spot Meters, Zone System & More

Kodak Tri-X 400 TX vs Ilford HP5 Plus developed in FX 55

Kentmere 400 vs. HP5: DEEP DIVE film comparison!

Kodak Is Splitting Apart ...and It Changes Everything

Cinestill Double-X

Tips On Shooting Film - Ilford Delta 100

Overexposing vs Underexposing: Ilford FP4

Film Photography For Beginners. Which Film and Why?

IS THE MORE EXPENSIVE B/W FILM STOCK WORTH IT? KODAK T-MAX 100 | ACROS II 100 | ILFORD DELTA 100

