Ilford FP3?

[hoffy]

Howdy,

I just picked up some bits and pieces for my foray into the dark....amoungst the lot was an unopened tin (200ft) of Ilford FP3.

Can anyone give me an indication on how old this would be? I am thinking from the early 70's, but I have know idea. Does anyone know what I should do with it (Hey, I might as well try it at some stage, but I have no idea on how it would be processed)

Cheers and thanks

 

[jim appleyard]

Yeah, it's old. I think you're right about the early 70's, but I cannot confirm that.
If you do a search here, you'll find lots of references to souping old film in HC-110. You'll likely have some fog and HC-110 seems abole to reduce it. You'll also lose some film speed, too. You may want to shoot it at an EI of 50 and bracket.

DF Cardwell (who seems to know a thing or two about film) suggests Diafine for old film. I've never shot much old film, but Diafine is a speed increasing developer and you may get EI 100 out of your FP-3.

You can also use the HC-110 and Diafine on other films so your money won't go to waste.

 

[nworth]

It's old. FP3 preceded FP4, and I have a PLI page for FP4 that is dated 1984.

 

[Anscojohn]

I have some FP-3 times and temps buried in my notebooks if anyone wants me to begin digging.

 

[hoffy]

Not just yet. I think I will find a nice dark place to put this tin for a while. Once I get myself up to speed on normal processing, then it might be worth my while.

Now, the tin does mention "Motion Picture Film". Is this going to be any different?

 

[Anscojohn]

Not just yet. I think I will find a nice dark place to put this tin for a while. Once I get myself up to speed on normal processing, then it might be worth my while.

Now, the tin does mention "Motion Picture Film". Is this going to be any different?

*****
Back in the early 1970s Freestyle sold Ilford movie stock as their Essex brand which was treated just as if it were FP-4. No frame markings, though. I still have negs shot on it. IIRC, I souped it in Edwal FG-7 with sulfite.

 

[Adrian Twiss]

Am I right in thinking motion picutre film was also slightly thicker to reduce the chances of breakage during filming?

 

[Ian Grant]

Back in the late 60's I used quite a bit of FP3 & HP3 while still as school because it was very cheap, but it was only available from a few surplus stores, in the UK,as bulk lengths by 69/70. Only FP4 & HP4 were available in the shops by 1968, when I bought my first SLR. HP4 was released in 67, FP4 in 68.

FP3 was good film but FP4 was a definite improvement with finer grain, & better sharpness, it was widely regarded as being the best medium speed B&W film available for many years until the introduction of T-grain films like Tmax & Delta 100.

Ian

 

[PhotoJim]

The fact that it's motion picture stock certainly won't matter (as long as it's actually 35mm film stock ). I am playing with Eastman Double-X 5222 film and there is quite a large community of people who are using it for still photography. In theory there is a higher risk of emulsion defects (they matter a lot less at 24 fps) but I haven't seen evidence that this is actually a worry.

Definitely play with the film. A friend inherited some FP3 sheet film a few years ago in an auction sale and he shot some. It was very usable. Nice film!

 

[Ian Grant]

Much of the FP3 I used was motion picture film repackaged. It was no different except had no frame numbers.

Ian