Ilford FP4 Plus: Advice needed

Hi, a few hours ago I posted (there was a url link here which no longer exists). APUG friends suggested to post here so, here I am. Note: Scan made by lab. Prints looks better (made by lab using image shown).

--- This is the post@ APUG:
Hi, I took this photo -> http://www.flickr.com/photos/luisaguero/4475812716/ with Ilford FP4 Plus @ 133 (the 2nd mark after 100 in Leica M6 ISO selector).

It was a sunny noon. I measured the light in middle zones near the tree and closed aperture to get some detail of the sky.

Film was processed 7 min @ 24C with Jobo CPP and HC-110 dil. B.

Im not fully convinced on results. I think the sky is too grainy for a 125 film. My previous experience with films in that sensibility was with Ilford Pan 100 (example: Dead Link Removed ).

I want to know:
1) Do you like the photo?
2) I was wrong measuring light? or...
3) Film was overdeveloped or..
4) A combination of 2 & 3 contributed to the result?

Every critic and advice will be wellcome
Luis
__________________
luis agero
my good and not so good work at http://www.flickr.com/photos/luisaguero

I can't say about the combination of FP4+ and HC 110 dilution B.

Last night I developed a dozen sheets of 4x5 FP4+ EI 125 in Rodinal 1:50 for 20 minutes with agitation every 5 minutes and they are excellent. Maybe you could do some film speed and development testing.

Curt

Could be the scanning, have you tried getting a wet print done?

It looks and sounds like you might have underexposed, then scanned with the settings set to get the density right. This would cause increased grain. But as far as I can see from the Flickr photo, the grain does not look like HC110b grain (which is usually a bit sharper, and not nearly so run-together. I suspect there is some sort of aliasing going on to compensate for an incorrectly exposed negative (that is to expand the range, so the sky, and sunlit landscape are both shown with plenty of detail.)

And yes, I liked the picture. It looks like much of Western Arizona, We have, by the way, a town in Arizona named Patagonia. I wonder if it is due to any resemblance to the South American region?

7 min @ 24C in Dil B? Yes, that's probably somewhat overdeveloped. Ilford recommends 9 min @ 20C for EI 125 which is only 6min @ 24C. That's also for a small tank with only intermittent agitation. IIRC, Jobo with continuous agitation, times should be shorter.

After reading Your words I think both developement and scanning could be the cause. I don't have enlarger yet, and -as far as I know- there's no lab with enlarger in my city, so mi prints are made by the lab: film scan and "chemical print". The good new is that I have made a print in the lab an results are not optimal but highly acceptable, actually I like the printed version, ok print looks better (7.5/10). Everything is perfectible so I want to come back to Lonco Luan

Regarding developement, i bought recently the Jobo and following Jobo indications (start with spiral tank developement times, then adjust until desired developement). I got nice results, in 400 (TMAX & HP5) and TMAX-3200 in available light locations. Massive dev chart was not clear for FP4 roll so i followed Ilford Instructions inside the box: 7 mins@24c or 9min@20c. Now, looking at Inford Web you can read the next in this processing chart:

"For use in rotary processors without
a pre-rinse, reduce the spiral tank
development times by up to 15%. A pre-rinse
is not recommended as it can lead to uneven
processing."

So, my fellows, I overdeveloped film

Chris101: I was looking in the web pictures from Patagonia (Arizona). At, least in that photos there is some resemblance!!

Thanks for Your support!!

Luis