HP5 , what next?

[Melvin J Bramley]

HP5 autowinder February 1983, was it a good year?
Yet another blast from the past to challenge my commitment to the darkroom!
72 exposures is a lot of effort just to test a film.
Time to bring out my dusty motordrive?

 

[Chuck1]

Did you get the developing reels?

 

[Don_ih]

Use an slr. Shoot some frames then cut them off in the dark. Expect serious fog and a speed of about 50, if it hasn't been frozen. HP5+ (the current version) ages terribly -- I doubt the old version fares much better.

And @chuckroast is right - you can't fit that length of film on a standard reel.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Did you get the developing reels?

Yes I did.
In my earlier voyage into B&W photography I was gifted with some rolls of HP5 Autowinder and the accessories before it was introduced to the market!
As for then and now, I have never had reason to expose more than 20 exposures or so before the need to develop and print them!
I am retired!! I have the time..

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Did you get the developing reels?

yes, both plastic and the autoloader, if it can be called that.

 

[loccdor]

If you want 72 exposures without the drawbacks of expired film, you might try a thin bulk roll of something like Svema Foto 200. You can even do 720nm IR with that at an ISO of around 25.

 

[ic-racer]

I still have a few of those in my freezer. I got mine new in 1986. I don’t use them because last I checked (15 years ago) base fog was over 0.6 log d.

Curious how your rolls have fared.

I have both the plastic and metal 72 exp reels, but I usually just loaded on conventional reels and cut ; losing a frame .

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

I still have a few of those in my freezer. I got mine new in 1986. I don’t use them because last I checked (15 years ago) base fog was over 0.6 log d.

Curious how your rolls have fared.

I have both the plastic and metal 72 exp reels, but I usually just loaded on conventional reels and cut ; losing a frame .

I was just gifted the HP5 .
Like the exposed Pan F of my earlier posts ; I will over develop by 20% and add some BTZ.
I like your idea of cutting the film and using regular 'Paterson" reels.

 

[tezzasmall]

72 exposures is a lot of effort just to test a film.
Time to bring out my dusty motordrive?

For my 65th birthday this year, I was given a lovely new Pentax 17, a 1/2 frame camera, which, you've guessed it, gives twice as many exposures on a roll of film, than what a 'normal' SLR uses.

It also came with some rolls of Kodak Gold, which was my favourite film for holidays in years gone past. The price of having the films D+P'd shocked me initially though!

I think the amount of images on a film will feel a bit strange initially, but I am usually really conservative when taking images. Maybe with this I will become a little looser and try more than one or two exposures on a scene. Who knows?

But 72 exposures on a standard roll of 36 would just stress me out I think, and I too would have to cut and develop at least at the midpoint of the film.

Terry S
UK

 

[Kodachromeguy]

This topic of the thin base HP5 pops up every few years. I think you need a different film back to be sure the film is positioned at the right distance from where the lenses are supposed to focus. Leitz advertised such a back, but I do not know if it went into production. Other companies, unknown.

 

[dynachrome]

I can think of two possible solutions. You can put a separate thin film behind the one you are trying to shoot or you can find a working Contax RTS III with the vacuum back. In the past, I have developed Kodak Imagelink HQ 35mm film using a Kodacraft tank with a film apron. The thin film was too difficult to fit into a Paterson type reel and was not easy to get into a stainless steel reel either. The cameras I tried it with did not have a problem with the film thickness.

 

[mshchem]

Absolutely ridiculous to worry about 35mm film thickness.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Absolutely ridiculous to worry about 35mm film thickness.

Tis a trait of the Leiconians and Hasselbladians that seek film and equipment purity!
Image be damned!

 

[Don_ih]

Tis a trait of the Leiconians and Hasselbladians

You said that to a preeminent member of that group.

 

[ic-racer]

I have been reloading the 72 exp cassettes with thin based film recently.