Ilford HP5+

[Alex1994]

I've got 3 rolls of this on holiday with me here in Greece (plenty of other films as well) 2 35mm and 1 in 120. I plan to shoot two of them at around box EI and push the other one.

This will then be developed in D-76 in my Paterson tank.

What EIs are ideal for this film? 400, 320, 800, 1600...what do I need to consider, what works well, what do the results look like. I'm interested in just about everything about this film.

Thanks

Alex

 

[R gould]

Alex, is it HP5 or HP5+? if it is the HP5 then that has not been made for a number of years so is very much out of date, if it is the newer HP5+ then I use it all the time, I use it at box speed and develop it in Champion promicrol, which I use at 1/19 as opposed to their 1/14, and develop for 11 minutes at 24, I would go for box speed and standard times in D 76,Richard

 

[Alex1994]

whoops HP5+, purchased very recently.

 

[Jon Butler]

I do a lot of photography in Greece with HP5+ and because the high contrast light there I rate it at 200.
JON.

 

[Blanc]

Hi,
You can use HP5+ at it's best below 400 iso.

As I'd bet that you can read french, This article should be interesting for you.

I won't endorse the whole thing but I had quite success on this film rated from 50 to 3200 with various developpers (and better results with the Thornton 2 baths)...

 

[George Collier]

As Jon mentioned, high contrast conditions might lead one to give slightly more exposure (he doesn't say, but I assume to hold back, or "pull" development to avoid blocked highlights).
Why do you already know you want to "push" one roll? (Less exposure and more development). Remember, the less exposure will weaken shadow detail, which will not be strengthened by over developing.

 

[36cm2]

Posted wirelessly..

Use it all the time at 320 souped in HC110. It may not be as flexible pushed as other choices (Tri-x). It's my go to 400 speed film.

 

[Alex1994]

Thanks for all the help and the interesting article from Blanc. I would like to push a film for night photography, perhaps of a party or 'panigyri' as they are called in Greece. I think I'll go for one roll at 200, another at 400 and another at 1600, as Ilford gives dev times for D-76 at these speeds.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I mean no disrespect - but these are the things you want to test before you do any important shots, like when you're on vacation, possibly in a place you will never revisit.
It sounds to me as if you're testing the film - while you're using it, instead of testing first to see what works before you use it for important, or valuable photographs where you want to KNOW what comes out when the film is developed.

To 'push' - deliberately under-expose the film, and then over-develop it to regain a portion of the tonal range of the film is a compromise. Why not use a film, like Delta 3200 or TMax 3200 (both are about ISO 1,000 or so) that is designed for the purpose of low light shooting?

Anybody's opinion here, or elsewhere, will likely not be perfect advice for you, since we all work differently, have different equipment and technique, and have different lighting conditions. The only reliable source of the type of information you are asking comes from your own testing.


Or, perhaps the experimentation is part of your recreation, in which case I'll stop arguing. Enjoy your vacation! Greece is a beautiful country.

Thanks for all the help and the interesting article from Blanc. I would like to push a film for night photography, perhaps of a party or 'panigyri' as they are called in Greece. I think I'll go for one roll at 200, another at 400 and another at 1600, as Ilford gives dev times for D-76 at these speeds.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I'd say it depends on the light. If it's really contrasty and harsh (a safe bet for Greece) then you want to *pull*, as some have already mentioned. It will lower the contrast.

If light is average or even, then feel free to shoot either at box or push a bit -- it will be contrastier but it's a nice film anyway.

HP5+ is a fairly forgiving film so check Ilford's stats (and the Massive Dev. Chart) for a good starting point.

 

[Blanc]

And try to consider the kentmere 400 too it's a really nice film with a bit less contrast than the HP5+.

And why not using this opportunity to try the 2 bath from barry thornton

 

[Alex1994]

Never heard of two-bath, care to share?

 

[Blanc]

A damn crazy developper from a damn god of fineprint photohgraphy...

The first bath loads the emulsion with developping agent, and is poured back onto the bottle. The second one is a booster for the developping agent, the reaction works untill there is no developper left in the emulsion. The great thing with it is that as soon as high lights are developped the reaction stopts there but it keeps ging in the shadows.
Combined with a slight overexposure (+0.5/+1) it leads to some of the best negs i've ever saw (far better than every commercial stuff)

 

[Stoo Batchelor]

Alex

More info here on Two Bath

http://www.barrythornton.com/

Just click on 'Two Bath' at the bottom of the page.

Best

Stoo

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Combined with a slight overexposure (+0.5/+1) it leads to some of the best negs i've ever saw (far better than every commercial stuff)

Care to show us how much better it is by showing prints from negatives made both ways?

 

[Blanc]

Dead Link Removed
sorry for the unwanted size. HP5+ 200 (to make the +1 on the little mamiya U) souped in a slightly altered recipe ( more contrast+ heavy grain as I like my concert shoots) (and unfortunately badly digitalized it's far far better on paper)

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Blanc, that doesn't really prove anything.

All it shows is that it's possible to make an OK print from an HP5+ negative developed with a two bath developer. It's a negative without shadow detail, but decent mid-tones and highlights. It looks typical of an underexposed negative that is push processed.
How is this better than other developers? Show me.

Thanks,

- Thomas

 

[Blanc]

Thomas,
you seem to need more accurate examples than I can provide you now.
Thats not the subject of this post and well to show you how I'll need to set up an experiment involving some film and a lot of various developpers plus a huge control on the developpement parmeters, using film from the same bath of emulsion, controlling exposure (calibrating a set up indoor with no exterior light to pollute this...).

Plus as I won't be able to make it for all films and developpers this will only show what can be done on some couples... Well I'm sorry but that's a long term experiment.

For the picture I showed you, it's an extreme example, not that typical of push processes HP5+. I'm working with this film since more than 10 years and even if I love it, we both know it can't handle having those contrast variations like that even in Emofin (there will be a lack of midtones and maybe no shadows at all) or diafine.

I'm not preaching, but giving some informations on my personal experience and convictions. This developper should be tried, it's quite softer than for example D23 and really flexible (I'm using it on Foma, Kentmere Delta, HP5, FP4, Era, Shanghai, Adox and efke with the same developpement time and sometimes the same tank...)

Well if one day I'm ready to preach I'll do the set up buy a lot of various developpers some meters of various films and do it, but now I'm focused on something else. So if you need proofs why not giving it a try to see if it's ok for you?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Blanc,

Thanks for explaining.

I have tried a lot of different developers, and the real secret lies in learning how they work, both limitations and strengths, and use both to your advantage. Knowing your materials intimately makes a lot of difference. I spent eight years trying films and developers. As a result my work suffered. Having switched to a very small arsenal of products I have managed to learn a lot more about those materials, and how to adjust tonality and negative contrast from many different lighting situations. That knowledge has taken my photography farther than any developer or film ever has, and that is why I challenge notions like the one you made, because I just don't think it's true, and you can really do somebody a dis-favor by stating so, especially if they are new to the process.

I understand that I led the thread astray, and I apologize for that, but there is no magic in materials. But - there is magic in how you use them.

- Thomas

 

[topoxforddoc]

HP5 pushes really well in XTOL . I routinely rate this at 1600 and process using Kodak's published times. Here's a sample from the Reichstag in Berlin

Best wishes,

Charlie
www.charlie-chan.co.uk

 

[Blanc]

I do rate HP5+ from 50 to 3200 (the same with kentmere 400 a little less peach in the contrasts...) Thats a really great and versatile film...

 

[nworth]

My experience with HP5+ is limited to sheet film, but I've found it to be a quite remarkable film. It has terrific latitude and withstands highlight blocking well. But I agree that it is best right around the rated speed - 320 or 400. As noted above, careful exposure is the key to great negatives with any film. Your results with HP5+ will definitely be better if you are careful and if you bracket a bit when unsure, but HP5+ is quite forgiving.

 

[johnnywalker]

Posted wirelessly..

Use it all the time at 320 souped in HC110. It may not be as flexible pushed as other choices (Tri-x). It's my go to 400 speed film.

What dilution time and temperature are you using? I'm planning on starting to use HP5+ very soon in 4x5, as my Foma 100 is fast running out. I have been using dilution H at 20 degrees C at 8 minutes for the the Foma 100.

 

[Alex1994]

Thanks for your informative advice, I will rate one at 200, one at 400 and one at 1600

 

[2F/2F]

I use it (and every film) at box speed, unless I want to apply exposure compensation to every single picture I shoot on the roll.

EI (film rating) need not be connected to processing (i.e. pushing or pulling). You can push or pull no matter how you expose your film. A film is not pushed or pulled when it is rated and exposed. It is pushed or pulled when it is processed. You may want to over or under expose a film and process it normally, for instance. In certain cases, you may want to overexpose it and push process it. (I do this in in flat light, such as fog or cloudy weather.) You can also under expose and pull process, though the times I do this are very rare. (I have done it in compositions in which all of the actual tones being photographed are high tones, and I want to bring them down to something more "standard" looking.)

When I speak of under and over exposing, I speak of doing it based on incident light readings. Using in-camera reflected meters or other methods of metering the light reflected from objects within the composition itself introduces too many variables to be able to make broad statements about how one should expose and process ones film. In these cases, this will vary from shot to shot, depending on the brightnesses of what you are metering and your metering pattern.