hp5+

[naaldvoerder]

Read somewhere HP5 doesn't mate very well with Rodinal, while it works with just about any other developer. I develope mine in Ilfotec HC. A very easy and fine combination for me. Much better then I am a photographer..

 

[Lachlan Young]

I might get some bad batch which is easy in Canada.

Extremely unlikely. How long was the mixed developer left sitting before use? And which developing time did you use?

 

[ME Super]

Characteristic curve, when developed in Rodinal (named "Blazinal" in Canada) is something I never saw before:
[==snip==]
I did test three times for I could not believe that Ilford can make such bad Film. I am done with hp5 for ever.
This shape of the curve is not even and close to what Ilford shows when developed in Ilford developer. I just dislike it very much and bought 30 m of Tri-X which I am about to test, and from information I have now it is to expect much better characteristic curve.

Did anyone tested the Film in other developers and made characteristic-curve (density vs tone II to VIII)

I'm sorry to hear that the Ilford HP5+ did not work well for you in Rodinal/Blazinal. It's my go-to B&W film, but then again I'm not developing it in Rodinal, I'm sending it to a lab. I found the Tri-X of the 1990s to be too high a contrast for my liking, but the HP5+ of today is, in my opinion, the bees knees for B&W film, unless I'm doing infrared B&W. I find I like the look of HP5+ @ EI1600 to be more to my liking than Delta 3200 @ box speed; the Delta 3200 grain is a bit over the top for me, while the HP5+ is grainy but with character and not overwhelming. HP5+ @ EI1600 in DR5's process is darn near magical.

Good luck with your Tri-X though; I suppose different films for different folks. I'm about to write a review on abusing Ektachrome E100 by exposing it at EI 800 and leaving it in the first developer for 15.5 minutes.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've been buying HP5 in Canada since 2002, and I've never had a "bad batch". That includes all the HP5+ I imported from Canada to Japan. Why don't you try it with another developer, like Xtol or D76?

 

[BainDarret]

HP5+ is now my main B/W film. Plenty of contrast when developed in stock D76. I've tried it with stock, home brew, D23 at E.I 200 and I find I get minimal base fog, luminous shadows and wonderful highlight tonality. I've been buying Ilford products, in Canada, since 1968 and have never once had a defective product. That would include hundreds of rolls of HP5+. Whenever I try a new film I start with the manufacturer's recommendations for developer and times. I rarely stray far from those recommendations as it seems the manufacturer knows their products well.

 

[Pieter12]

For the last couple of years I have been shooting HP5+ at 160 and developing it in Rodinal 1+38 for 7:30 and I like the results.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Maybe OP is after a specific look...

 

[Lachlan Young]

Maybe OP is after a specific look...

Even if they are, there's nothing that couldn't be achieved with another developer (or more likely, solving the error they made).

 

[Wallendo]

If the OP is happy with TX400, there is no reason to change.

I just finished 100 feet of HP5+ and it is a good film, but I prefer the look of TX400. I could probably adjust my development of HP5+ to make it look more like TX400, but it is easier just to shoot what works for me.

On the other hand, if I don't like the look of a film I usually just use something else and don't start an online thread about it.

 

[Craig75]

For the last couple of years I have been shooting HP5+ at 160 and developing it in Rodinal 1+38 for 7:30 and I like the results.
View attachment 214196

Lovely shot. I like hp5 in rodinal too - my go to combo.

 

[Kodiak]

Developer was on the Film in the matter of minutes after diluted. Three test did with various times, the same problem (if a problem) just different Gamma.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Developer was on the Film in the matter of minutes after diluted. Three test did with various times, the same problem (if a problem) just different Gamma.

Were you working at 1+25, 1+50 or 1+100? Ilford suggest not going above an EI of 400 at 1+50 (aka their tests probably suggested it ran out of steam attempting to get above a G-bar of 0.6ish), the USA Agfa Rodinal data sheet recommends against 1+50 & HP5+ entirely & suggests that at 1+100 & 15-20 mins developing time, a gamma of 0.45-0.5 will result, with a claimed EI of 100-160. Try again at 1+25 if you haven't already.

For what it's worth, the same Agfa data suggests that Tri-X has no problem hitting a 0.65 gamma at 1+50 or 1+100.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Even if they are, there's nothing that couldn't be achieved with another developer (or more likely, solving the error they made).

And that is why I suggested... twice... trying a different developer.

 

[Ian Grant]

For the last couple of years I have been shooting HP5+ at 160 and developing it in Rodinal 1+38 for 7:30 and I like the results.
View attachment 214196

My preferred Rodinal dilution was 3 to 100 close to your choice, I found with most films 1 to 50 was flat and 1 to 25 too contrasty. I used Rodinal extensively from about 1987 to about 2004/5 but I was using APX100 and Tmax 100 and rarely 400 ISO films,

These days I use a lot more 400 ISO films Delta 400 for 120 and HP5 for 5x4 (hand held) and I'm getting superb results with Pyrocat HD.

Ian

 

[jvo]

HP5+ has been my main film for over 20 years. ...
....Different developers and dilutions can alter the curve somewhat. You should base your decisions on actual images, rather than curves. They only tell part of the story.

i used to use tri-x and rodinal, then switched to t-max 400 - always rodinal. never did any sensitometry... just love the prints i make.

sometimes i wonder if i should do all the measurements, testing, negative densitometry, proper proof et al... then realize i like the process and the resulting prints. call me lazy!

a thought - if you're not happy with your results keep testing different materials - just as long as it's fun and you're moving forward.

 

[Trask]

For the last couple of years I have been shooting HP5+ at 160 and developing it in Rodinal 1+38 for 7:30 and I like the results.
View attachment 214196

Very nice photo that — and I appreciate the “1+38” which requires dividing total volume desired by 39! I may try your method but opt for 1+39, just so I don’t have to use a calculator!

 

[Pieter12]

Very nice photo that — and I appreciate the “1+38” which requires dividing total volume desired by 39! I may try your method but opt for 1+39, just so I don’t have to use a calculator!

it works out to:
RODINAL
1+38
14ml + 531ml
16ml + 609ml
31ml + 1179ml

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

When I used Rodinal it was 1+63 since I wanted more dilute than 1+50 and was working with imperial/ounces.

The higher dilution was paired with infrequent agitation for acutance and hopefully a little speed gain, rather than lower contrast being the goal.

J

it works out to:
RODINAL
1+38
14ml + 531ml
16ml + 609ml
31ml + 1179ml

 

[Ian Grant]

it works out to:
RODINAL
1+38
14ml + 531ml
16ml + 609ml
31ml + 1179ml

Few (if any) will have graduates that are accurate to mix those dilutions. A more sensible approach is to go to:

1+39 or rather 1:40 which is 10ml part developer made up to a total of 400ml with water perfect for a Paterson tank which needs 375ml minimum for each 35mm reel, or 12.5ml mixed to 500ml with water for a 120ml reel.

Ian

 

[Pieter12]

I use this: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01ECAQPWA/ref=cm_sw_r_em_tai_c_2c2mCbRC3JCY8

 

[Ian Grant]

For safety reasons I don't keep glass graduates in the darkroom but then I'm typically mixing a litre or two of chemistry at a time.

I still prefer to measure the small volume and mix to the larger total, it's the way we always worked in laboratories..

Ian

 

[Kodiak]

Gamma of the Film can be adjusted however you want, and is not specific to Film or developer. Water (e.g. city, distilled, …) used for developer is also in the game.

I did try with 1:50 and could not get Gamma 0.65 (density) even after 23 min developing (20 deg.C) so I did a try with 1:25 but Gamma did vary a lot along the curve again, so I gave up on HP5+.

Guys, I am not new with HP5+ but never in past had a such a problem.

I do not thing I will change Rodinal to any other developer for 400 iso Film. Buying another developer leads to need of another experience, complicates things and make me more overstocks. I will rather change the Film, and Tri-X is nothing behind HP5+ in any sense.

I do have around 5 HP5+ (36 exp each) from another batch and curiosity sake I will test and this batch too.
I see some guys ask why actually I spend time testing Films. I just want to know what I am doing, I know how to test Films, and I want to know how my Photographs will looks like before I take a camera in my hands. To test a Film takes me c.1 hour only and I have so many benefits out of that. I do not like "let it go, and whatever comes out sometimes fine sometimes who care, average is OK"..

 

[Lachlan Young]

Gamma of the Film can be adjusted however you want, and is not specific to Film or developer. Water (e.g. city, distilled, …) used for developer is also in the game.

I did try with 1:50 and could not get Gamma 0.65 (density) even after 23 min developing (20 deg.C) so I did a try with 1:25 but Gamma did vary a lot along the curve again, so I gave up on HP5+.

Guys, I am not new with HP5+ but never in past had a such a problem.

I do not thing I will change Rodinal to any other developer for 400 iso Film. Buying another developer leads to need of another experience, complicates things and make me more overstocks. I will rather change the Film, and Tri-X is nothing behind HP5+ in any sense.

I do have around 5 HP5+ (36 exp each) from another batch and curiosity sake I will test and this batch too.
I see some guys ask why actually I spend time testing Films. I just want to know what I am doing, I know how to test Films, and I want to know how my Photographs will looks like before I take a camera in my hands. To test a Film takes me c.1 hour only and I have so many benefits out of that. I do not like "let it go, and whatever comes out sometimes fine sometimes who care, average is OK"..

So, essentially all you have done is show why 1+50 isn't a great idea (as all the datasheets suggest) and that at 1+25, the development times are difficult to keep consistent with your specific process/ equipment (which is why datasheets all contain warnings about sub-5 minute development times). It is not the materials that are at fault here. How about trying 1+30, 1+40 etc & seeing if they allow a compromise between needed contrast index & a development time you can get consistency from?