Ilford FP4 plus

BradS said:

Did you have problems with the anti-halation layer clearing?

Click to expand...

Yes, but not just a failure to clear. There appears to be a gelatin layer on the backside of film -- perhaps to hold the anti-halation layer on and perhaps to help keep the film from curling towards the heavier gelatin layer on the other side.

My guess is that the hardening fix hardened that gelatin layer and would not allow it to release all the chemicals making up the anti-halation layer. What was left was patchy chemical residue-looking junk on the back. JLP -- I believe any non-hardening fix would suffice, but please feel free to maintain your anti-Ilford bias. Kodak does (or in many cases, did) make quality products.

Perhaps it is because the back of the film is against the wall of the drum and it takes longer to get rid of the layer than with any other development method. Thus the hardener would do its thing before all the components of the hardening layer could be removed. I have not had this problem developing FP4+ in trays and using hardening fixers.

Long washes would not remove the chemical deposits on the back, though soaking in a tray of fixer after removing the film from the drum did help reduce it. I suppose I could take a few of those negatives and experiment -- try acid baths, alkaline baths (to soften the gelatin), steel wool pads, or whatever it takes to clean them up. I have some nice 8x10 negs that I can not use.

But FP4+ is a good film. HP5+ is a different beast altogether!

Vaughn

But FP4+ is a good film. HP5+ is a different beast altogether!

Vaughn[/QUOTE]

Yep HP5+ is just wonderful best thing since sliced bread in my book, versatile, punchy and very forgiving in 35mm 120 and 5x4 all deved in ID11.

Good job we aren't all the same or there would be no diversity at all. Now to try Foma see how it compares. This photography thing is such FUN.
Best regards Paul.

JLP said:

If it takes so specialized fixers as the Ilford rapid fixer they can have it.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't consider Ilford Rapid Fixer to be 'specialised'.


Steve.

JLP said:

Good that some can apreciate Ilford film, i can no longer. Whether it is Delta 100 or FP4+ my Jobo Expert drums just does not like Ilford film. I continue to have issues on the back of the film facing the drum. It looks like sombody was walking on my film. I have used pretty much all other Large Format film on the marked and have not seen any issues at all. I am done with Ilford.

Click to expand...

Jan,

I am surprised you have had these issues. I went thru over 150 sheets of 4x5 and 50 sheets of 8x10 FP4 & HP5 over the last year, all processed in Expert drums, and never had these problems. I was using mostly Pyrocat-HD & D76. My fix was either ilford rapid or Kodak, (about 50/50, its what I can get locallay) granted I never tried TF4 or any other fixers.

FP4 is my favorite film, followed quickly by Fuji Acros for LF.

Hope it helps.

Gary

Is there a significant difference between Plus-X and FP=4? I always thought them very similar," old style" (non-tabular grain) medium speed films. Please disabuse if I am missing something.

RJS said:

Is there a significant difference between Plus-X and FP=4? I always thought them very similar," old style" (non-tabular grain) medium speed films. Please disabuse if I am missing something.

Click to expand...

They are both "medium speed" black and white films, as you say. from my experience, I find FP4 to be a bit more contrasty than Plus-X, but I also think that Plus-X is a bit prettier for the in between grey tones, which I think it renders a little prettier. Both are great films, and I might be wrong, so somebody who has been at this stuff for longer should probably give a better explanation. For me, the biggest difference is the contrast, and which company I give the money to. on that, I might add that since Freestyle sells Plus-X as Arista Premium 100, you can get PX for cheaper in 35mm, if thats your cup o' teac

I was not aware that TF4 and Zonal Pro are hardening fixers but i could of course be wrong on that to.
Will give the "specialized" :rolleyes: Ilford Rapid fix a try and maybe use what i have left of Ilford film in the freezer if it works.

As Vaughn, i have tried extended fixing in trays and also prolonged wash time but have not seen any difference.
3 different developers, Pyrocat MC, DD-X and FX37 with both FP4+ and Delta 100 and still the same messy patern on the back.

A film with tremendous latitude. I think you can over expose up to six stops and still get a usable negative. I use it over Delta 100 for landscape work.

ID-11 is my favorite with this.

Paul. said:

But FP4+ is a good film. HP5+ is a different beast altogether!

Vaughn

Yep HP5+ is just wonderful best thing since sliced bread in my book, versatile, punchy and very forgiving in 35mm 120 and 5x4 all deved in ID11...Paul.

Click to expand...

I agree. The qualities you like in HP5+ make it difficult to use for me. It may be "punchy", but for the use in making negatives of very high contrast for alternative printing (such as platinum and even more for carbon printing), I need a film that is a harsh mistress and unforgiving. I need a film that when one gives it a good goose, it sings a few octaves higher than mere silver gelatin can handle. Kodak copy film was quite unlady-like and rather fun to dance with.

I would like to give HP5+ another try in light that already had 8 or 9 zones in the scene...and just give it a little push.

Vaughn

RJS said:

Is there a significant difference between Plus-X and FP=4? I always thought them very similar," old style" (non-tabular grain) medium speed films. Please disabuse if I am missing something.

Click to expand...

FP4+ is available in sheet film sizes. Plus-X is not. Even in 35mm, FP4+ is less expensive and more readily available than Plus-X.

There are also differences in the 'look and feel' of the two films too. These are things you can't see on a data sheet. Some of these differences are subtle and others not so subtle.

Both are fantastic films.

RJS said:

Is there a significant difference between Plus-X and FP=4? I always thought them very similar," old style" (non-tabular grain) medium speed films. Please disabuse if I am missing something.

Click to expand...

Probably the biggest difference is colour response, in that different colours are rendered in slightly different shades of grey, and they respond slightly differently to different developers. Personally I have always preferred the look of Ilford films, in the older style. I have not tried the T-max films and have done very little with the Delta films so I don't know if I would like those better. XP-2 didn't impress me, as I like to have the option of wet printing my B&W stuff, I am unlikely to try the Kodak Chromogenic films. When my current stash of FP4 is done I plan on getting a role of TMax 100 and Delta 100 and doing a comparison to see which of the 3 films I like best.

wogster...I have seen some great prints printed in darkrooms using XP-2. There is no problem using XP-2 negs for B&W silver gelatin prints...much better than Kodak's chromogenic films, IMO. Vaughn

Vaughn said:

wogster...I have seen some great prints printed in darkrooms using XP-2. There is no problem using XP-2 negs for B&W silver gelatin prints...much better than Kodak's chromogenic films, IMO. Vaughn

Click to expand...

I didn't say you couldn't, I wasn't impressed by XP-2, I don't remember off hand why, as it was a couple of years ago. The Kodak Chromogenics are a different beast they are designed to make colour prints that look B&W, IMNSHO the worst of all worlds. At the time I thought I was better off simply using FP4 and processing at home. As I said, I haven't done much with the uniform grain films, like TMax and Delta, so I need to do some experimenting there. Right now I have about two years worth of film, and I want to clear some of that out before I buy more again. Anywhere from half to three quarters of my shooting is with a d*****l camera now, so the film I have could last even longer.

I have landed on FP4+ also as my regular film, once APX 100 went away. I develop it in Rodinal.

Paul Sorensen said:

I have landed on FP4+ also as my regular film, once APX 100 went away. I develop it in Rodinal.

Click to expand...

+1 exactly!

Carey Bird
http://members.iinet.net.au/~cbird/index.html

BradS said:

FP4+ is available in sheet film sizes. Plus-X is not. Even in 35mm, FP4+ is less expensive and more readily available than Plus-X.

There are also differences in the 'look and feel' of the two films too. These are things you can't see on a data sheet. Some of these differences are subtle and others not so subtle.

Both are fantastic films.

Click to expand...

Please tell me where Ilford film is more readily available than Kodak, I want to move there.

sidearm613 said:

Please tell me where Ilford film is more readily available than Kodak, I want to move there.

Click to expand...

They are probably about equal here in Canada, and I would think Ilford would be more readily available in the UK.

FP4+ is my almost-everything b&w film, I develop it it 1+1 in ID11.

I have some in the fridge that I havent shot yet. Hopefully I'll get shooting it (and developing it in Rodinal, of course) when it stops raining every f***ing day...