FP4+ versus Plus X

Coffee!

A
Coffee!

  • 0
  • 0
  • 38
masked reader

A
masked reader

  • Tel
  • Jun 25, 2022
  • 0
  • 2
  • 62
Shoes f2.4 paper negative

A
Shoes f2.4 paper negative

  • 0
  • 2
  • 98
Schtumptd

A
Schtumptd

  • 0
  • 0
  • 60
Venice030

A
Venice030

  • 0
  • 1
  • 138

Forum statistics

Threads
177,846
Messages
2,441,526
Members
94,328
Latest member
thedwp75
Recent bookmarks
0

mhainz

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
49
Location
melbourne, a
Shooter
35mm
What are people's thoughts on these films. How do they compare / differ as far as resolution, contrast, exposure latitude, ease of use.

I believe emulsion characteristics can differ between sheet film and roll so please comment on which format your experiences are.
 

modafoto

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
2,101
Location
Århus, Denma
Shooter
Medium Format
mhainz said:
What are people's thoughts on these films. How do they compare / differ as far as resolution, contrast, exposure latitude, ease of use.

I believe emulsion characteristics can differ between sheet film and roll so please comment on which format your experiences are.

Both are great for my work (mostly portraits) and I think they're pretty similar (like Tri-X vs. HP5+). Both films are classic emulsions and work very well with Rodinal (I have to that when I am the High Priest in the Church Of Rodinal) :tongue:)
I have only shot the films in 35 mm (FP4 in MF, too...but not Plus-X)

Greetings Morten
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
7,231
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Shooter
35mm
I used to shoot a lot of Plus-X -- began using FP4+ when Plus-X got to be hard to find. No regrets. Is it just me or, is the FP4 a little more prone to scratch in the developing tray? (sheet film)
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
2
Shooter
4x5 Format
It's not just you. The Ilford sheet films are prone to scratches during tray development. That is why I prefer Kodak sheet film over Ilford.
 

dr bob

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
870
Location
Annapolis, M
Shooter
Medium Format
GaussianNoise said:
I used to shoot a lot of Plus-X -- began using FP4+ when Plus-X got to be hard to find. No regrets. Is it just me or, is the FP4 a little more prone to scratch in the developing tray? (sheet film)

That seems to be the case here. Also, the emulsions are not the same. In addition, the emulsion on PXP roll film is quite differrent from that used on the sheet film. Kodak's designation did indicate a difference, but the term "PX-" still sounded like they should/would be identuical - they weren't. AFAIK, Kodak no longer makes the sheet film. A great loss to me personally.
 

pschauss

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2002
Messages
243
I have found Plus X a bit more contrasty than FP4+. This seems to give it a faster effective speed. I find that I get the best results out of Plus X if I meter it at 125, while FP4+ works better if I meter at about 80. This is for 135 format, developed in D76 1+1.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab
Top Bottom