EI - FP4 in Rollo Pyro

[markbarendt]

So just starting my practical tests of FP4 in Rollo Pyro, this is my first real test roll of FP4+ in this developer and this not a step wedge test.

Developed in a JOBO exactly per Formulary's instructions except for a time adjustment based on temperature.

I'm not seeing the speed loss I expected versus DD-X. In fact looking at the EI 250 frame I'm thinking I could get away with 250 quite nicely here and there. At EI 125 is showing really strong shadow detail.

The test roll was shot in sunny 16 and verified with an incident meter. RB67 with a 180mm KL that has shown no shutter issues.

Am I dreaming?

 

[climbabout]

So just starting my practical tests of FP4 in Rollo Pyro, this is my first real test roll of FP4+ in this developer and this not a step wedge test.

Developed in a JOBO exactly per Formulary's instructions except for a time adjustment based on temperature.

I'm not seeing the speed loss I expected versus DD-X. In fact looking at the EI 250 frame I'm thinking I could get away with 250 quite nicely here and there. At EI 125 is showing really strong shadow detail.

The test roll was shot in sunny 16 and verified with an incident meter. RB67 with a 180mm KL that has shown no shutter issues.

Am I dreaming?

I can tell you that I made extensive tests with FP4+ with Pyrocat HD and I have determined my EI to be 160 with that developer and my particular development regime(8x10 developed in homemade pvc tubes in an upright position/minimal agitation/very dilute solution) Arriving at an EI greater than box speed is not impossible.
Tim
p.s. - meant to say my "EI" is 160

 

[markbarendt]

You know the drill, Mark. Hard to evaluate without at least a side by side comparison of the same shot developed to the same contrast, print them both etc. etc. All I can really offer is I doubt a speed of ISO 125 with FP4 can be exceeded with Rollo Pyro (and it would be difficult to measure). As for EI, it's whatever you decide (you already know this).

Yeah, I know.

The comparison to DD-X was partly, but not completely, tongue-in-cheek.

My real surprise was that Rollo Pyro doesn't seem to slow FP4 down near as much as Formulary's sheet and the general scuttlebutt around the water cooler might suggest.

 

[markbarendt]

I can tell you that I made extensive tests with FP4+ with Pyrocat HD and I have determined my EI to be 160 with that developer and my particular development regime(8x10 developed in homemade pvc tubes in an upright position/minimal agitation/very dilute solution) Arriving at an EI greater than box speed is not impossible.
Tim
p.s. - meant to say my "EI" is 160

Thanks for the input climbabout. Nice to hear somebody else is seeing similar EI's.

I'm kinda wondering if there was a "West Coast" influence for the suggested EI in the instructions.

 

[markbarendt]

Well, time to do some testing in the wild.

I printed the frame taken at 250 and it has nice shadow detail everywhere I expect it. There were three non-test shots on the same roll shot at 125 that had plenty of shadow detail.

Truly, surprised so far given the general reputation of Pyro developers.

 

[markbarendt]

May be true on the image wide stain.

The first roll I did in Rollo Pyro was an older roll of TMY, well cared for though. On that roll there was a distinct amount of fog that got stained, not bad and not a surprise.

The FP4 base though is as clear as glass. The last roll of FP4 that I put though DD-X wasn't as clear.

My WD2D+ negs have more base fog too.

 

[markbarendt]

Just finished developing and drying the next test roll. 3 sets (one set front lit, one cross lit, and one back lit each) of 3 frames each (shot at EI 125, 250, & 500), all selfies.

125 is looks great, 250 looks workable with some loss, 500 looks near blank in the shadows. Well see in a few days when I print.