Ilford FP4+ vs Delta 100 (4x5)

[cirwin2010]

My favorite 100 speed film is Fuji Across II, but unfortunately it is not available in 4x5 sheet film. I typically use Ilford HP5+ in 4x5 as it's very easy to print at grade 2-3 at box speed (400) with a condenser enlarger. But even with a 4x enlargement the grain can come through depending on the negative density and how close I push my nose to the print. I don't dislike film grain, but sometimes I like to have the option of using something finer (and combining it with Rodinal ).

I've tried FP4+, but I'm struggling to come to grips with it. I find that it gets easily overcooked in the highlights when exposed and developed at box speed or IE 100. My last round of FP4+ I exposed and developed for IE 64 which yielded nearly identical shadow density and highlight density as HP5+ exposed and developed for IE 400.

Its great that I finally figured out how to control the contrast of FP4+ for medium to high contrast situations, but I'm not seeing much benefit to using FP4+ for 4x5. Yes it does have less grain than HP5+ when developed in xtol, but its not that much smoother for how much speed loss I am getting. Makes long exposures, well, really long once reciprocity failure comes into play.

It's been a long time since I tried Delta 100. I remember I didn't find it as great to work with (for me) compared to tmax 100 or Across II and I think it was a bit grittier. What should I be expecting if I decide to give this a try in 4x5? Is it much finer grain than FP4+ and how quickly does it build density at box speed when compared to FP4+? It's more expensive than FP4+ in 4x5 and not as widely available.

Note: Yes I know tmax is available in 4x5, but its silly expensive compared to the Ilford offerings.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have not used Delta 100 in 4X5 but was not impressed when I used it in 35mm and 120. I currently use Foma 400 and 200 in 4X5 and 2 1/4 X 3 1/4 but have been thinking about HP5. What developer do you use? Have you tired D76 stock or Microdol X stock?

 

[pentaxuser]

Doesn't it all depend on the size of the enlargement. In a blind test at what size can anyone tell the difference in a 4x5 enlargement between FP4 + and D100? A pretty big size I'd have thought but what counts is whether you can see any difference in your size of prints

You can but try D100 to see. I don't think that any overall definitive answer that will be tip the scales in D100's favour is likely to be forthcoming

Just a thought on my part

pentaxuser

 

[jeffreyg]

You may want to try HP5(400) developed in PMK Pyro Two stops faster than FP4+(100) finer grain than you would expect esp since you are using 4x5. Box speed. You would have to find the time that works best for you. For me it's 20mlA:40mlB + 2liters distilled water (for my old rubber tanks) for 20 min 30 sec @ 70F.

ABOUT | JEFFREY GLASSER

HOME | SCULPTURE and PHOTOGRAPHY

 

[retina_restoration]

I use Delta 100 in 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 sizes and I like it a lot. Yes, it has a distinct "look" compared to Ilford's other offerings, but it has the ability to separate high value detail far better than FP4 or (most certainly) HP5. I tend to use a divided developer with Delta 100, as it gives an excellent range of tones while controlling the high values very well.
What it comes down to is whether or not you like the look it gives. It's distinct, and for some, that's not what they want.

Here's a sample image made on Delta 100, developed in a 2 bath developer. For comparison, here's the same image made on Adox CHS 100 II, (also developed in Thornton Divided).

 

[cliveh]

The box speed of FP4 is 125 ISO. Give it correct development and you will have no problem.

 

[BrianShaw]

The box speed of FP4 is 125 ISO. Give it correct development and you will have no problem.

That's been my experience, especially when developed with the Ilford-recommended developers. I typically use DD-X one-shot.

 

[Alan9940]

After shooting FP4+ in 120 and 4x5 for many years, I'm surprised to hear that you're having issues controlling it. I always found this stock to be VERY forgiving in exposure variances and I've never experienced blowing out my highlights with any developer formula I've tried.

I've also shot quite a bit of D100 in all formats from 35mm to 8x10. Nothing wrong with this film, but I will say that it's not as tolerant to incorrect exposure and/or non-controlled development technique. I wouldn't pick one over the other based on grain characteristics; either will produce very fine grain, depending on the developer formula used. I've always liked D100 developed in DD-X, but found a "marriage made in heaven" with D100 developed in Clayton F-76+. YMMV, of course.

 

[snusmumriken]

I use Delta 100 in 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 sizes and I like it a lot. Yes, it has a distinct "look" compared to Ilford's other offerings, but it has the ability to separate high value detail far better than FP4 or (most certainly) HP5. I tend to use a divided developer with Delta 100, as it gives an excellent range of tones while controlling the high values very well.
What it comes down to is whether or not you like the look it gives. It's distinct, and for some, that's not what they want.

Here's a sample image made on Delta 100, developed in a 2 bath developer. For comparison, here's the same image made on Adox CHS 100 II, (also developed in Thornton Divided).

That's a gorgeous image in both versions!

I had an email conversation with the Ilford engineers back when Delta films were introduced, just to ask whether by any chance they had done tests in a 2-bath developer. They hadn't, but expressed an interest to know how it turned out. So I guess, like me, they wondered whether the thinner emulsion could carry enough developer into the second bath. As you and I now know, it can and does.

 

[DREW WILEY]

FP4 is one of the easiest films to control, and what is often recommended to beginners, including by me. It has a moderate toe followed by a long straight line. Delta 100 is similar; and for that reason I shoot both of them at 50, to boost any deep shadows up the curve further. Delta builds contrast quite a bit faster, with a potential upsweep in the curve which separates the highlights especially well. You have to be careful not to overdevelop it. It's a T-grain film, with grain slightly finer than FP4, but about halfway between that of TMax 100 and TMax 400.

I personally prefer TMX 100 over D100 because the straight line is steeper, further down into the shadows, allowing excellent tonal separation down there even at full box speed of 100. I also prefer the specific spectral sensitivity of TMax over Delta. But I regard all of the aforementioned as excellent films, each with its own personality.

HP5 has the longest toe, so I don't like it for high contrast scenes. And due to its larger grain, I don't shoot it in any size smaller than 8x10. But otherwise, it is a lovely film too for the right applications. PMK pyro does wonderful things with HP5.

 

[loccdor]

Of the developers I've tried with Delta 100, I prefer HC-110 E dilution 1+47, 8 minutes at 20C @100.

I like FP4+ in 510-pyro 1+100 10 minutes 20C @125 the most.

These are both 35mm, your experience may vary. I've only tried 5-10 developers.

 

[Kino]

My favorite 100 speed film is Fuji Across II, but unfortunately it is not available in 4x5 sheet film. I typically use Ilford HP5+ in 4x5 as it's very easy to print at grade 2-3 at box speed (400) with a condenser enlarger. But even with a 4x enlargement the grain can come through depending on the negative density and how close I push my nose to the print. I don't dislike film grain, but sometimes I like to have the option of using something finer (and combining it with Rodinal ).

I've tried FP4+, but I'm struggling to come to grips with it. I find that it gets easily overcooked in the highlights when exposed and developed at box speed or IE 100. My last round of FP4+ I exposed and developed for IE 64 which yielded nearly identical shadow density and highlight density as HP5+ exposed and developed for IE 400.

Its great that I finally figured out how to control the contrast of FP4+ for medium to high contrast situations, but I'm not seeing much benefit to using FP4+ for 4x5. Yes it does have less grain than HP5+ when developed in xtol, but its not that much smoother for how much speed loss I am getting. Makes long exposures, well, really long once reciprocity failure comes into play.

It's been a long time since I tried Delta 100. I remember I didn't find it as great to work with (for me) compared to tmax 100 or Across II and I think it was a bit grittier. What should I be expecting if I decide to give this a try in 4x5? Is it much finer grain than FP4+ and how quickly does it build density at box speed when compared to FP4+? It's more expensive than FP4+ in 4x5 and not as widely available.

Note: Yes I know tmax is available in 4x5, but its silly expensive compared to the Ilford offerings.

Here's Delta 100 in 4x5 and D-76 1:1 @ 68F/20C:

1887 Rapidan School and Library Building

The exterior of the one room school house.

www.photrio.com

The shadow on the shade side of the building was EV 11 1/3, which was my Zone III. The white front of the building was EV17 1/3. The roof on the shade side was EV 15. The sign was EV 17 and the shade under the porch was EV 13 2/3. Meter was set on ISO 100. Development time was 6 min @ 68F/20C in a Stearman SP445 tank.