Ilford FP4+ in HC110 tested. From way to contrasty to normal.

Rouse st

A
Rouse st

  • 4
  • 3
  • 50
Do-Over Decor

A
Do-Over Decor

  • 1
  • 1
  • 83
Oak

A
Oak

  • 1
  • 0
  • 68
High st

A
High st

  • 10
  • 0
  • 98

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,231
Messages
2,788,257
Members
99,837
Latest member
Agelaius
Recent bookmarks
2
OP
OP
reneboehmer

reneboehmer

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2024
Messages
127
Location
Austria
Format
Analog
Don't worry. I am a native speaker and I had and still have as much difficulty interpreting what the OP quoted from Ilford originally as you have with it

Once the full reply was shown it appears that contrast may be of minor concern to Ilford or no concern at all in all cases of developer times except those given for ID11.

Ilford says: "We supply the information on our tables to give speeds using different developers but these are more accurately described as EI values (Exposure Index). The contrast at the particular speeds with particular developers will be variable and not something we have ever quoted."

I still wonder how Ilford works outs the times it does give as EI values Is there a formula for it or what

It does give a time for Ilfotec HC of 8 mins for an EI of 125 which is 1 min less than for HC110 Whether this produces a negative that looks more like the OP's neg at 5 mins I have no idea

Hopefully for those who use Ilford film and Ilford developers other than ID11, the resulting contrast of the negative is close to "normal" or close enough that MG papers can cope with the differences

pentaxuser

I have repeated my tests with Ilford HP5 in HC110 at Ilford times and this creates a G-bar value (or curve shape) that is in line with a "normal" development. It could very well be only the FP4 HC110 combination that results in a too steep curve.
 
OP
OP
reneboehmer

reneboehmer

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2024
Messages
127
Location
Austria
Format
Analog
I am glad there are people interested in the fine details of such things. I have just metered, exposed, developed, and printed based on previous experience (and note-taking). Then use the print/image qualities to judge instead of the graphs. So I appreciate that Ilford keeps it simple and is concerned with the real-world use of film. Seems to me that those who are concerned with more detail tech info can generate it themselves.

I am not going to be facing the exactly lighting used, contrast range, and such used for the ISO testing/determinations for 99.99% of my images. I do not need or want the sort of precision or accuracy that allows for the drawing of graphs. Definitely a personality thing -- YMMD, and probably should.
Thats valid!
 
OP
OP
reneboehmer

reneboehmer

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2024
Messages
127
Location
Austria
Format
Analog
I've always rated FP4 and FP4+ at 50, half of box speed, in order to boost most of the exposure up onto the long straight line section of the curve. That certainly helps, regardless of specific developer. With most developers, it's been 10 min at 20C. FP4 is one of the easiest films to learn exposure and development with - what I generally recommend to beginners; it's relatively forgiving.
Many ways lead to Rome :smile:
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
1,296
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
I am glad there are people interested in the fine details of such things. I have just metered, exposed, developed, and printed based on previous experience (and note-taking). Then use the print/image qualities to judge instead of the graphs. So I appreciate that Ilford keeps it simple and is concerned with the real-world use of film. Seems to me that those who are concerned with more detail tech info can generate it themselves.

I am not going to be facing the exactly lighting used, contrast range, and such used for the ISO testing/determinations for 99.99% of my images. I do not need or want the sort of precision or accuracy that allows for the drawing of graphs. Definitely a personality thing -- YMMD, and probably should.

In with you in this way of working. But not on Ilford's information policy from what I understand it to be from this thread. Because I don't measure what I'm doing, all the more do I appreciate accurate starting points from manufacturers. I already knew I could develop the film for an arbitrary time to get a random contrast, I don't need the manufacturer to give me this information.
 

Vaughn

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
10,124
Location
Humboldt Co.
Format
Large Format
I use FP4+ at ASA 100. Nice even number compared to 125.
The way I determine/assign which shadows get exposed for 'Zone III', the use of reciprocity failure as a tool, and my expanded development (usually an additional 100% of normal), I (usually) get the deep information-rich shadows in a carbon print that I often want for redwood images. Pretty sweet for platinum, too, but I use a little less development than I would for a carbon image.

It is a useful adaptable film.

Always on a wing and a prayer...
 

john_s

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Messages
2,150
Location
Melbourne, A
Format
Medium Format
I have repeated my tests with Ilford HP5 in HC110 at Ilford times and this creates a G-bar value (or curve shape) that is in line with a "normal" development. It could very well be only the FP4 HC110 combination that results in a too steep curve.

I don't think I've ever read that someone got excessive contrast using HP5+.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom