HP5 for a year!

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Brian, I am making 6x8", 9x12" and 14x18" from 35mm TMax 400 and Fuji Acros (and some Delta 3200).

 

[brian steinberger]

I'm jealous Thomas that you're printing onto 16x20. I'm so close to doing so, but just need a little bigger sink, and a print washer and I'm there! But the price per sheet... $$$

 

[cjbecker]

Well I ordered xtol, new bottles, and Tf 5 fixer. I am set for a while bought 2 of each.

 

[yeknom02]

I'm wondering... how does one replenish XTOL?

 

[MattKing]

I'm wondering... how does one replenish XTOL?

With more X-Tol! (about 70ml or so per roll developed).

There are a lot of threads here about that very subject - here is one:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[jmcd]

cjbecker: Well I ordered xtol, new bottles, and Tf 5 fixer.

Please keep an eye on this fixer's capacity with this film. I mixed up a half gallon of TF-5 and the fixer was exhausted after about 4 rolls, where it should have been good for about 36. I was told it was because of the high iodide levels in the film. So I have been since using TF-4 or Ilford for my film, and using TF-5 on paper.

I have used HP5+ quite a bit, much of it in Xtol. But for the past couple of weeks I have been using it in replenished Xtol (thank you, Thomas!) and the negatives have a glow in the print.

 

[cjbecker]

Please keep an eye on this fixer's capacity with this film. I mixed up a half gallon of TF-5 and the fixer was exhausted after about 4 rolls, where it should have been good for about 36. I was told it was because of the high iodide levels in the film. So I have been since using TF-4 or Ilford for my film, and using TF-5 on paper.

I have used HP5+ quite a bit, much of it in Xtol. But for the past couple of weeks I have been using it in replenished Xtol (thank you, Thomas!) and the negatives have a glow in the print.

Thank you, i will keep my eyes watching for it.

 

[Laurent]

Thank you, i will keep my eyes watching for it.

After some very bad surprises in the past, I now run a clip test for my fixer before starting the development session. I found this to be more accurate than counting the number of films, and easier to do.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

If you list your lens list , enlarger lens list , paper , paper developer and attach few scans you want to reach , I would recommend a developer or film.
Otherwise its useless.

Umut

 

[hpulley]

After some very bad surprises in the past, I now run a clip test for my fixer before starting the development session. I found this to be more accurate than counting the number of films, and easier to do.

Ditto, clip test, clip test, clip test... for fixer it is so quick to do and is much simpler to mix up a new batch right away than refix a wet roll of film which is already off the reel.

It is good to clip test your developer too though this takes longer.

 

[Laurent]

It is good to clip test your developer too though this takes longer.

May be the best reason to use single-shot developers (at least that's my main reason). But I agree the stock solution needs to be fresh enough (never had surprises yet, touching wood )

 

[hpulley]

May be the best reason to use single-shot developers (at least that's my main reason). But I agree the stock solution needs to be fresh enough (never had surprises yet, touching wood )

Yes but I read about people using a bottle of stock Xtol they haven't touched in 6 months and then they're surprised when it doesn't work... sure if you used the stock solution last night or last week it is probably OK but if it has been even a month then you are better off testing it on a clip than a whole roll!!!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Never say never. Testing the developer can never be a bad thing. Or the fixer.
I basically test for activity every time I use my developer, and I test the fixer too, for capacity, with the film clearing test. Better safe than sorry.

- Thomas

 

[fschifano]

I am a fan of the Deep, thick, and rich blacks. That is the look I want to get.

That's really more a function of good printing practicws rather than which film developer is used. The idea of film processing is to get as much detail as possible on the film, then to use that detail to make the print you want to see.

As far as film developers for HP5+ go, there's really not much out there that's clearly head and shoulders above D76 (ID-11), or XTOL. It's all a matter of working out a technique that makes the negatives that work for you. Differences in film developers are not that dramatically profound when considering general purpose developer as are printing controls when aiming for a specific look.

 

[Laurent]

Yes but I read about people using a bottle of stock Xtol they haven't touched in 6 months and then they're surprised when it doesn't work... sure if you used the stock solution last night or last week it is probably OK but if it has been even a month then you are better off testing it on a clip than a whole roll!!!

I know I should do it, even if XTol never failed me (I decant it 5 liters in 5 1 liter bottles, and use Protectan). Murphy's law being what it is, I guess I'll start doing this test before it happens (I agree on "netter safe than sorry").

 

[Allen in Montreal]

Clark,

What type of images do you make most often? People, street scenes, landscape?
I have not read through all the posts in this thread but, a few thoughts and hoping I am not repeating others.
I used Tri-x for over 30 years and have slowed, almost to a stop, since they messed with the formula in 2007.
I now use mostly HP5+ in 35, 120, 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10.
It is a really good film and you will enjoy the year long testing.

I started with D-76 1:1 and have slowly moved towards X-tol at 1:1. Both print beautifully.
I have used PMK Pyro with 35mm and sheet film and it a great combo for scanning and printing on graded papers.
I am testing PyroCat HD for printing with MG papers as the PMK has a color cast that is said to restrict some of the responsiveness to MG papers. It scans very well with PMK, too soon to comment on Pyrocat, but I bet it will be nice.
Are you planning on printing on silver paper or scanning the negs?
I think I read that you have never used powdered developers?
Mix them and break them down in many smaller batches, they last and last (I use 16oz bottles for stock which then make one batch of working solution).
Dilute 1:1, use and toss.
Do not replenish.
I have never had a failure. Mark the date mixed on one bottle in masking tape if you are uncertain about shelf life. Mixing HC on the fly was great, but the new work flow of powder is fine too (God I miss the old tri-x in dil B).

John Sexton has said D-76 builds strength with age. Something to think about if it takes a long while to use up a batch of soup at 1:1.
I don't run D-76 past it's due date. X-Tol I have run late without issue (so far).
But the cost of soup is low and it is not the place to skimp given the time invested in taking your images.

Enjoy the HP-5, it is not the TX or TXP of yesteryear but it sure is nice film if the look and feel of it appeals to your eye.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Do not replenish.

Why?

 

[Allen in Montreal]

Because they (D-76 and X-tol) perform much better diluted than straight and once diluted they are a "one shot" developer, unlike Tmax or HC-110 etc.

Dilute 1:1, use and toss.
Do not replenish.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I see. You are recommending to not replenish when Xtol is diluted with water.

To me it sounded as though you recommended against replenishing Xtol as a developer, and as opinions vary, Xtol performs beautifully as replenished, but of course it's a stock solution, and not diluted.

Thanks for explaining.

 

[cjbecker]

Just developed my first roll. The negatives looks fantastic.

I lied its tf4 not tf5

 

[cjbecker]

So I have been using the setup for a while now. Been tweaking the development, tweaking how i shoot the film, and learning its limitations. All i can say is wow. It is a never ending precess but it is great. Thank you everyone.

 

[matthewm]

How about Ilford's ID11? I haven't used it in years, but I remember it being great.

 

[frobozz]

ID11 is precisely equal to D-76, isn't it? So he's basically already tried that.

Duncan

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

So I have been using the setup for a while now. Been tweaking the development, tweaking how i shoot the film, and learning its limitations. All i can say is wow. It is a never ending precess but it is great. Thank you everyone.

I am extremely happy that this is working out for you. There is so much to be had from a single emulsion, so many looks to be had from a single emulsion, just by varying how we expose and process it.

 

[kcoloton]

I shoot a lot of HP5 in 4x5 and 120, and I am a big fan of HC110 as the developer for this film.