HP5+ in overcast light, box speed, how would you process it?

[Athiril]

Had plenty of Tri-X with me. But haven't shot much HP5+, been meaning to, so did, was overcast yesterday.

Shot at box speed.


I have access to Rodinal, Xtol (stock or replenished), HC-110, Aculux-3 and T-Max Developer.

I was shooting some portraits with it.


Heard people do not like it in overcast conditions.



How would you process it in with what I have available? Ilford says +20% development time for overcast conditions may be a nice idea on their page.

 

[brian steinberger]

I love it in overcast light, but shoot it a bit more than box speed, around 500 or 640. And I develop in ID-11 1:1. I'd go with either Xtol and or HC-110 and develop at recommended time.

 

[Michael W]

I mostly use Rodinal and Xtol. Would use Rodinal for this as its likely to give you a bit more contrast than the Xtol. I have also found the Massive Dev Chart times for HP5 in Rodinal to be wrong (generally they are spot on.) For Rodinal, or Adonal, 1+50 they suggest 11 minutes where I find 13 is correct. I have also seen this reported by others, e.g. if you look at Flickr and search for HP5 in Rodinal times.

 

[lbenac]

I like it in 510-Pyro 1:100 70F semi-stand 20 minutes = 1 minute agitation and 9 minutes stand then 1 minute agitation and 9 minutes stand.
This is for 4x5 in tank.


Cheers,

Luc

 

[Gerald C Koch]

When faced with low contrast situations the rule is to underexpose and overdevelop. Just how much depends on the subject contrast. This is when a spot meter is useful. Since overdevelopment increases density the exposure must be reduced to compensate. Reading a book about the zone system especially expansion and contraction of the luminance scale would be very helpful.

 

[Michael W]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists). It's about Neopan film, but comparing the looks from processing in Xtol and Rodinal. I think it covers exactly the situation that Athiril is dealing with and suggests that Rodinal is the best choice to boost the highlights, thus giving more contrast.

 

[polyglot]

Do you want crunchy with sparkly highlights (Rodinal) or do you want smoother with more midtone separation (XTOL)? Given the flat light, shadow speed should not be an issue and I'd be tempted to go for the Rodinal especially if you like a really bitey look.

(I'm not really a fan of HP5 or 400TX though, so take this with a big grain of salt)

 

[Athiril]

I guess I'd like dark blacks with long contrast up to the midtones, midtones up high near highlights, so that the midtones (skin) is very whitish/bright.

 

[polyglot]

I guess you'll be developing lots and printing long then...

 

[jeffreyg]

Overcast skies don"t always mean flat light it can be quite bright. I think developing for the contrast of the image space would be the way to go. I prefer overcast to bright sun generally and usually spot meter and develop accordingly. HP5 for my 4x5 and Delta 400 for 120 are my choices for film both developed in ID11 with the 120 at full strength and the 4x5 at 1:1. That said a recent foray into pinhole has me using Delta100 4x5 which is looking good as well.

"You pay your money and take your chances" it's only film.


http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[removed account4]

get rid of the developers you are presently using
process your film in caffenol c
with 10cc print developer / L caffenol. stand develop
it will do what you want ..

 

[markbarendt]

I guess I'd like dark blacks with long contrast up to the midtones, midtones up high near highlights, so that the midtones (skin) is very whitish/bright.

I see two things going on here.

1-Placement. Since the film is already exposured, the only choice left here is in printing.

2-Preference for mid to low tone detail.

Given #2 and the lack of importance of the highlights, I'm going to say Xtol, normal time.

I'd actually adjust the contrast rate with the paper grade.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I see two things going on here.

1-Placement. Since the film is already exposured, the only choice left here is in printing.

2-Preference for mid to low tone detail.

Given #2 and the lack of importance of the highlights, I'm going to say Xtol, normal time.

I'd actually adjust the contrast rate with the paper grade.

I'm with Mark, Xtol.

 

[c6h6o3]

I see this "rule" a lot on APUG. The rule to underexpose and overdevelop is incorrect. The proper procedure for expansion is to expose normally or increase exposure. The negative is then printed down if deep blacks are desired.

I agree. One should never underexpose. Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights. That adage is just as true today as it's ever been.

Whatever paper you'll print on has a much shorter scale than any film. I'm always trying to compress the scale in the negative, not expand it. Successful printing involves the art of matching the contrast of the negative to that of the paper.

 

[baachitraka]

The second photo in the book "The Print" - Ansel Adams, list out some common factors for the 'soot and chalk' quality of landscapes...

 

[Athiril]

get rid of the developers you are presently using
process your film in caffenol c
with 10cc print developer / L caffenol. stand develop
it will do what you want ..

Links to examples?

The second photo in the book "The Print" - Ansel Adams, list out some common factors for the 'soot and chalk' quality of landscapes...

I'll have a look.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

ilford is right!

 

[Athiril]

Increased times by 20-25%?

I'm really keen to see this coffee+print developer stand business, just to see what it looks like.

 

[baachitraka]

Please do not carry away by those fancy 'stand' business. You already have very good developers(viz., XTol) for HP5+. Develop according to manufacturer recommendation and print it. Then you really know where to tweak, what to tweak...

Overcast lighting is a bliss for photography, just incident meter the shadows then you will never go wrong.