Developer for FP4+ with no grain

[Curtis990011]

Hi guys, I'm trying to find a developer and dev time for Ilford FP4+ (120 6x7) so I can make relatively large prints with no visible grain. I also need to have good shadow and highlight detail.
I use a tripod so I can pull the film down as low as needed.
Thanks!

 

[Paul Howell]

Perceptol or Kodaks version Microdol X, 1:3. Although from the U.K not sure if you can it in U.K, MCM 100, (Miniature Camera Magazine) stock.

 

[Lachlan Young]

ID-11/ D-76 or Perceptol. Try all the dilutions from stock to 1+3 - you might be surprised at which one actually gives the best granularity/ sharpness balance. Aim for an EI of 50, start from Ilford's times. If you want a liquid, DD-X is a fair starting point. Ignore the magic bullets people promise you, it's mostly about balancing your exposure to be just enough to hold the shadow details you want & keeping your processing times from making excessively dense highlights.

How big is 'large' by your definition?

 

[Curtis990011]

ID-11/ D-76 or Perceptol. Try all the dilutions from stock to 1+3 - you might be surprised at which one actually gives the best granularity/ sharpness balance. Aim for an EI of 50, start from Ilford's times.

How big is 'large' by your definition?

Thanks for the suggestion.
I don't suppose I would print any bigger than 20x24 inches.

 

[removedacct1]

Grain properties are inherent in the film. No developer is going to influence the grain size so significantly that you can make a 20 x 24 print with “no visible grain”. To do that you need to be making 4x5 negatives or larger.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Thanks for the suggestion.
I don't suppose I would print any bigger than 20x24 inches.

You should be able to keep the grain fine and sharp, but not 'invisible' at that scale - albeit a lot also depends on viewing distance. Delta 100 offers a significant improvement in visible granularity and sharpness, and would be my strong preference over FP4+.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

FP4 Plus works very well in Tetenal Ultrafin. 6x7cm negatives to a 16"x20" with excellent quality.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Another possible option, if you're stuck with 35mm only, would be a film switch. Yes, TMax 100 or Delta 100 or Acros II would be an improvement over FP4+. Adox CMS20 (II) will easily make 20x24 prints from 35mm that would require magnification to see grain in the print, and can reach EI 32 in the right developer (H&W Control, which you can mix if you have a reasonable selection of photo chemicals -- phenidone, hydroquinone, sodium sulfite, sodium carbonate, potassium bromide, as I recall). Of course, that size print will also show off the limitations of your lens, and why you need to use a tripod and mirror pre-fire if possible when you'll be printing large...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Pyrocat-HD will muffle the grain somewhat. ....

 

[john_s]

If you're going to use an optical enlarger, you may find that at large magnifications you have trouble showing individual grains anyway. It's interesting to look at a negative under a microscope and see how much detail can be there which in printing is difficult to reproduce at a large magnification, even with doing all the right things with equipment, alignment, APO lens, etc.
I also think that TMax100 would be better for this task.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you're going to use an optical enlarger, you may find that at large magnifications you have trouble showing individual grains anyway. It's interesting to look at a negative under a microscope and see how much detail can be there which in printing is difficult to reproduce at a large magnification, even with doing all the right things with equipment, alignment, APO lens, etc.
I also think that TMax100 would be better for this task.

John is right. Years ago, I made a 20x24 print with Tmax 100, developed in Xtol 1+1. Very difficult to see grain.

 

[Paul Howell]

This begs the question, gain, resolution or acuity. Finest grain, highest resolution out side of a microfiche film Tmax 100, but apparent sharpness, Tmax or Delta 400.

 

[koraks]

Staining developers mask grain a bit; so pyrocat, 510 pyro, obsidian aqua, Moersch finol/tanol etc. will give reasonably fine grain with this film. High-solvent developers also de-emphasize grain a bit, so think e.g. XTOL/Mytol, Fomadon Excel. Then there's the specific class of speed-reducing fine-grain developers (which overlaps with the high solvent category) such as Perceptol etc. but also a variety of older formulas.

As said before, film grain is mostly inherent to the film itself, with a little variation due to the combination of exposure, developer and development regime.

If you need less grain, try either TMAX100 in the same format, or step up a size to 4x5".

 

[Ian Grant]

For up to 24"x20" prints I'd suggest Pan F rather than FP4 and develop in Perceptol 1+2, that's the combination Bill Spears used and his prints are superb.

Ian

 

[138S]

Hi guys, I'm trying to find a developer and dev time for Ilford FP4+ (120 6x7) so I can make relatively large prints with no visible grain.

Try Delta 100, Pan F 50, Kodak TMX. If your goal is big prints with no grain then you may start finding what film naturally delivers the finest grain.

Fine grain developers will help, but Xtol stock may deliver an optimal sharpness vs grain balance in a big print.

As Koraks, mentioned, you may consider using a pyro developer, but be aware that extra safety measures are necessary compared to xtol.

I also need to have good shadow

This is basicly about how you expose. Use spot meter and make a bracketing so see what shadow detail you get at -1.5, -2, -2.5 and -3 stops exposure. Use the spot meter in the shadows to know the underexposure and recall the results in the bracketing.

Xtol will deliver a 1/3 stops

Xtol will give you a 1/3 stop shadeow advantage.

highlight detail.

> Highlight detail is a lot about processing, more than about developer. Get The Film Development Cookbok for extensive knowledge.

> Expose for the shadows and develop for the lights. You may underdevelop N-1 or N-2 to not blow extreme highlights. Also make bracketings in the highlights to see how detail is conserved at different overexposure levels.

> Developer can be compensating to reduce highlight development, for example D-76 is semi-compensating. A fully compensating developer is Diafine, but you may want to use it with a tabular grain film like (resuscitated) Acros.

> Use reduced agitation, stand, semi-stand

> If you print optically then you may use a more shouldered film to not get high densities that are difficult to print, Pyro developers (510, HD ) help to print highlights, as stain color in the highligths reduce printing contrast with VC paper. If you scan then the thing its easy, just get use a film with large highlight latitude and edit curves in Photoshop.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

For up to 24"x20" prints I'd suggest Pan F rather than FP4 and develop in Perceptol 1+2, that's the combination Bill Spears used and his prints are superb.

Ian

To maintain sufficient developer capacity with rotary processing I have processed Pan F Plus in XTOL 1+1.5, I suspect Perceptol way work with this approach as well.

 

[Bill Burk]

I see the discussion has covered Delta 100 or Pan F or TMAX 100 so looks like the biggest suggestion has been made... pick a film with less grain

 

[Bormental]

Grain properties are inherent in the film. No developer is going to influence the grain size so significantly that you can make a 20 x 24 print with “no visible grain”. To do that you need to be making 4x5 negatives or larger.

Even with my limited experience developing film at home, I disagree. For some films, notably HP5+, the difference in grain between stock DD-X and stock Xtol is massive.

 

[Ian Grant]

Even with my limited experience developing film at home, I disagree. For some films, notably HP5+, the difference in grain between stock DD-X and stock Xtol is massive.

Paul Barden is partially right, to a large extent grain properties are inherent in the films's emulsion, with T grain films and similar like Delta 100/100 choice of developer has less effect on final graininess than with conventional films like FP4, HP5, Tri-X etc. So Rodinal can give extremely fine grain with Tmax 100 as fine as with Xtol but coarser grain with FP4/HP5 compared again with Xtol.

First choice is the film, then the developer that will give the best from that film.

Ian

 

[Lachlan Young]

Even with my limited experience developing film at home, I disagree. For some films, notably HP5+, the difference in grain between stock DD-X and stock Xtol is massive.

Except it usually isn't. If you're getting that vast a difference, something is going very wrong with your process. They normally give results which under darkroom printing/ high res scanning are (intentionally) pretty darned close to each other.

 

[Bormental]

Except it usually isn't. If you're getting that vast a difference, something is going very wrong with your process.

I would certainly hope for another explanation I think we tend to take "process" too seriously here. Compared to cooking, developing B&W film is child's play. Keep your shit clean, use distilled water if necessary, control the temperature within 1C, pay attention to time within 10 seconds (!) Unless one is mentally retarded, how can anything go wrong here? We only run into difficulties when we ask for it: replenishing, crazy dilutions, etc. Meh, I am talking about stock solutions and following data sheet instructions, i.e something a 7 year old can easily do.

 

[koraks]

Yeah, it's child's play running some film through developer. Tuning your film choice, subject matter, lighting conditions, exposure and development for optimal results, however, isn't necessarily child's play. Many good books were written about it - probably for a reason.

 

[pbromaghin]

How about Ilford PanF for 120 or Ferrania P30 whenever it comes out?

 

[Curtis990011]

I found a method for medium format 67 FP4+ that left me satisfied, with a diffusion enlarger, the grain was nearly unnoticeable on prints 20x16. I used Ilford FB gloss.

Zone system EI 80

D-23 no dilution (7.5g metol, 100g sodium sulphite, water to make 1L)

N development for me was 6m 20s with the Ilford agitation method. 20ºc.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Based on that, you might want to explore replenishing your D-23. From my scans it seems like well-seasoned D-23 replenished stock gives even finer perceived grain than fresh stock. It does require slightly longer development, but that's not a hard thing. DK-25R has one more ingredient than D-23, so shouldn't be a trial to mix...