FP4+ under direct sun, Xtol and Microdol-X... How would you develop?

Hello,
I have 4 identical strips (Hasselblad) each with 5 frames (from 125 to 32 in half stops: box speed to full shadow detail), and I have never used FP4+ for a sunny scene before: as I have no data at all or previous experience, I went for the bracketing and for the 4 strips... (Tripod, mirror lock-up, cable release, 80mm Planar, f/16). The scene is very important to me, and can't be done again... I'd like to hang a 20x20 print if possible.

Basically as I have not printed MF FP4+ before, I don't know if a 16x16 or 20x20 print (target is Galerie 3) will look better in replenished xtol or in 1+2 or 1+3 Xtol for acutance and a little grain... And if the grain way is the chosen one, how would that Xtol grain compare to Microdol-X very fine, sharp grain when diluted? I don't have Mic-X but a few 1 liter envelopes of real old Kodak Microdol-X which are working perfectly... What about reduced agitation and compensation? For 120 printing I use a condenser enlarger with a Rodagon 80mm...

So, anybody pulling medium format FP4+ with Xtol or Microdol-X?
Thanks in advance!

The scene was:
Both spot reflected on gray card and incident (sekonic) meterings were 1/250 f/16, so I used a 1 stop B+W deep yellow filter and made 1/125 f/16 my darkest shot, and did 4 more giving half a stop more light using half speeds.
In the fields, in a small open area between trees and bushes, there's a bright white wood old chair seen from behind in the bottom left foreground, and it's looking at other 2 white chairs a few meters away, top right, background. Focus on the left close chair, f/16, slight defocusing on the bottom chairs... Sunlight was hitting everything, as when composing for slide film.

I wouldn't be worried by the sunlight, I shoot in Turkey ans there's often marble around which I don't want to lose detail in and I don't have issues with Delta 100 or HP5 and FP4 which I used extensively in the past won't be any different. Maybe you should expose and process another roll of FP4 first, I'd go for Xtol at 1+2, I never liked any developer ID-11/D76 or Xtol at 1+3, what you need to do is nail down your development time before processing the important shot(s).

Ian

Thank you, Ian!
That's interesting... I think a bit of clean grain can help, and yet be decent grain on print, being a 6x6 negative... I guess it's possible, for 35mm (not the case) it would be better to dissolve grain instead of diluting xtol, but I may be wrong, and I'm not sure even about it, and less for MF...
So I take your recommendation seriously, thanks!

If you had a spotmeter it would have been more useful to know how many stops were in the scene rather than just metering from a greycard to make any decisions about pushing or pulling.

Dont overthink it. The combination of boxspeed FP4 and Xtol developement can't go wrong.

michaelfoto said:

Dont overthink it. The combination of boxspeed FP4 and Xtol developement can't go wrong.

Click to expand...

Can't go wrong, but can be better if a couple of things are done the best possible way for the final print... That includes dilution and agitation options.

Hi Juan. What i ment was that both this film and this developer is about as forgiving as you can get it. I use box speed, and i have tried dilution 1+1 as well as Xtol replenished. Not much difference there.
I ended up with repleneished Xtol. Times as written in Massive developement chart for undiluted/stock. Agitation in small hand tank (Jobo) for 30 seconds in the beginning and then 2 agitations for every 30 seconds thereafter.
Replenishment is adding 70cc of fresh developer for every 120 or 135 film.
Hope this is as more to your liking.
Michael.

Ian Grant said:

Maybe you should expose and process another roll of FP4 first

Click to expand...

I'd do the experiment with the developer I use most frequently - in my case, replenished X-Tol - but otherwise I agree totally with Ian.
Given that you are working with a film that you have little familiarity with, I would think X-Tol is a better choice than old Microdol-X that you aren't using regularly.

Hi Michael, thanks for both messages,,, I'm right now using my first Xtol ever, so I have replenished and stock Xtol at hand, and I've replenished with 80ml instead of 70mI... I have Rodinal too, by the way... I'm sure it can be wonderfully used with FP4+, but being Rodinal the developer I have used the most, I know it requires testing for getting the most out of a sunny scene: agitation is too decisive... (Unless someone with a 6x6 Kaiser condenser enlarger has a dev. time to offer...) So I think Xtol can be the best option, mostly being used with a sharp grain dilution as grain can help sharpness while remaining small, sharp and organized... FP4+ is good at that (compared to HP5+) because its grains are a lot more even as they don't have the design requirement of different size grains mixed for low light sensitivity and pushability... My biggest question is why so many people use Xtol replenished instead of using grain for the benefit of the image... I like grain... But I'm not blind: if replenished Xtol gives better tone in any way, I'm with tone above grain and acutance...
Hi Matt, what have you seen, while enlarging from 6x6, if we talk about less solvent action of Xtol, with FP4+ or any other film? You seem pretty sure abou preferring your xtol replenished in most or all cases... Apart from less visible grain, are there other benefits? Thanks.

Kodak's pub says Xtol 1+2 24°C for FP4+ @125: 8m ag.30s for gamma 0.58, and @64 7m for 0.52...
I think I need lower contrast even... Am I right or wrong?
Someone developing close to that?

Juan Valdenebro said:

Hi Matt, what have you seen, while enlarging from 6x6, if we talk about less solvent action of Xtol, with FP4+ or any other film? You seem pretty sure abou preferring your xtol replenished in most or all cases... Apart from less visible grain, are there other benefits? Thanks.

Click to expand...

I use X-Tol replenished with T-Max 400, Plus-X and T-Max 100. I don't have much Plus-X left sad so I have been working on becoming more familiar with the T-Max 100 so as to be able to transition to it.
X-Tol replenished gives me excellent highlight detail retention with all three films, Plus-X included. I'm looking at some 35mm negatives (unfortunately not enlarged or scanned yet for sharing) that were taken last summer on top of the mountain at Whistler, BC on a sunny day - deep, detailed shadows and highlights that pop (on the contact proof sheet at least).
I could probably get nice 16x20 enlargements from those 35mm Plus-X negatives. I'm confident I could get nice 12x16 enlargements from them.
X-Tol replenished also gives me good speed, and I really like the workflow with replenished developers.

Great, Matt... Highlights are definitely to be considered, as all three bright white chairs were hit by direct 11am equatorial line sun... Great to know replenished xtol is fine there... Thank you very very much!

Juan Valdenebro said:

Kodak's pub says Xtol 1+2 24°C for FP4+ @125: 8m ag.30s for gamma 0.58, and @64 7m for 0.52...
I think I need lower contrast even... Am I right or wrong?
Someone developing close to that?

Click to expand...

This is why you need to know the number of stops in the scene. The scene itself might only have 4 or 5 stops or it might have 10. Knowing this and the effect you want will govern your development time for your chosen paper. No one else can tell you this.

No Craig, I didn't meter scene's contrast because I know it for direct sun without walls or clouds sending fill at all. Thanks. And IMO my 2 questions quoted by you have more relation with my type of enlarger than with the direct sunlight film was designed for.