Ilford Ortho Plus

EASmithV · Mar 28, 2013

Hey All,

Just got a box of Ortho Plus in 4x5, and can't wait to try it out.
I'm wondering if anyone has some advice on shooting it.
I plan to shoot it at ISO 100 (or even better, 200) and develop in Rodinal or HC-110.

Dev times anyone? Sample Photos?

cliveh · Mar 28, 2013

I have used this in the darkroom, but not in camera. Just remember it has limited spectrum sensitivity.

Rick A · Mar 28, 2013

Why would you shoot it at 100 when its rated at 80 in daylight and 40 for tungsten? Just remember, it has no red sensitivity, and portraits with it will show skin as dark, and show every pore.

PhotoJim · Mar 28, 2013

I agree about the EI. If you want to shoot at ISO 200, get a film that is designed for it. Foma 200 is pretty nice film if you can get it, or you can shoot Tri-X at EI 200-250 if you adjust development accordingly.

skahde · Mar 29, 2013

Why would one want to shoot Ortho in the field? A blue filter with panchromatic film will do the same thing. This stuff can do nice tricks in the lab, though as you can safely handle it under red light.

Larry H-L · Mar 29, 2013

I use it in the field now and then. With a yellow filter looks much like regular B&W film. Easy to load and develop in lab with red lights on. I have a few posted over at LF photo from 4x5 and 8x10.

EASmithV · Mar 29, 2013

To address questions:

I like the look of ortho tones.
I like the grain structure of ortho films, which cannot be replicated with filtration.
Filtration is annoying for handheld use in my SLR.
Foma 200 is a great film, but it is not ortho.
I like even ASA ratings for the most part, and that extra 1/3rd stop could help for handheld use.

C'mon guys, you all are being as bad as Kodak recommending T-Max as a replacement for everything... Where is your sense of adventure?

Ian Grant · Mar 29, 2013

The grain structure of Ilford Ortho Plus is similar to FP4, I used both very extensively, that can't be changed by filtration.

Ian

Rick A · Mar 29, 2013

To replicate pan film with ortho, use a green filter to darken the sky. If you dont use a filter, the sky will print out as white with no cloud distinction. Red, orange, and yellow filters have little to no effect. Underexposing ortho film won't gain you any advantages, just underexposed film. I've shot two boxes of Ortho+ 4x5 so far and it does not have the exposure latitude of pan films.

EASmithV · Mar 29, 2013

Well, I just shot a test sheet, a portrait of my brother who has skin issues, to highlight the film's strengths and weaknesses.
As said above, it does seem to make the skin issues more evident, but we'll see what it looks like in positive.

However, saying that it will not push to 200 is incorrect, I had very good results. Details to follow.

Jim Noel · Mar 29, 2013

skahde said:
Why would one want to shoot Ortho in the field? A blue filter with panchromatic film will do the same thing. This stuff can do nice tricks in the lab, though as you can safely handle it under red light.

Not quite true. Although this idea has been proposed over the past 30 or so years, the results of a blue filter with panchromatic film come close but are not identical to those of orthochromatic film. I never leave home without some of each loaded in holders, often Tri-X Ortho and HP5+. No, Tri-X Ortho is not available and has not been for many years. The ability of ortho films to open up the shadows is much superior to that of filtered pan films.

rorye · Mar 29, 2013

I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
I've been playing with Rollei Ortho and I just love it.

PhotoJim · Mar 29, 2013

I say go for it - I would like to try some ortho film at some time. I just don't agree with underexposing it. Shoot it at its rated ISO (or run exposure tests to determine your personal EI) for best results. Cameras don't care if ISOs are "even" or not.

ME Super · Mar 29, 2013

You can shoot at a different ISO if you push or pull process

PhotoJim said:
I agree about the EI. If you want to shoot at ISO 200, get a film that is designed for it. Foma 200 is pretty nice film if you can get it, or you can shoot Tri-X at EI 200-250 if you adjust development accordingly.

I have to respectfully disagree. I normally shoot slide film, which has next to no exposure latitude (yes, I know this is a B&W forum). I wanted some 400 speed Provia (400X) to shoot my son's birthday party, and the local camera store, Creve Coeur Camera, didn't have any. I did the next best thing. Grabbed a roll of Provia 100F out of the fridge, wrote on the film cassette "Push 2 stops", loaded it in the camera and shot it at ISO 320. Took it to Creve Coeur Camera and told them to have the lab push 2 stops, and the pictures turned out just fine. I dare say they turned out comparable to shooting at box speed.

PhotoJim · Mar 29, 2013

You can get decent quality pushing film, but you will always lose shadow detail. Always better to shoot a film of the appropriate speed than to shoot a slower speed film with push processing.

EASmithV · Mar 29, 2013

I only developed 1 sheet so far to see if my dev time was good, and it was. The neg is thin, but not underexposed thin, it almost looks like staining developer thin. My Brother's skin looks worse in person, to the acne issue wasn't as bad as i was expecting.

This is a straight scan. The skin looks almost metallic!

here's the info:
Handheld 4x5
Graflex RB Super D
190mm Ektar f/4.5
Ilford Ortho Plus rated @ ISO 200
Adonal (Rodinal) 1:100 for 20 minutes at 70 degrees, shake agitation every 4 mins
1/60th at f/8.5

skahde · Apr 2, 2013

Jim Noel said:
the results of a blue filter with panchromatic film come close but are not identical to those of orthochromatic film.

You certainly have a point here as the sensitivity added to the silverhalide through the sensitizing dyes will hardly ever exactly match the spectrum removed by filtration. If done right it can be done but if you want to have the same exact effect as using ortho, using the right film is certainly more straightforward.

This reminds me of my experiences with using tungsten film which I could never quite match by using daylight fim and filtration, but I could get close.

EASmithV · Apr 4, 2013

here's more

Handheld 4x5
Graflex RB Super D
190mm Ektar f/4.5
Ilford Ortho Plus rated @ ISO 200
Rodinal 1:100 for 20 minutes at 70

premortho · Apr 15, 2013

Well, I must say that I was amazed to read that yellow filtration had no effect on Ortho film. The information put out for 75 years must have been all wrong, I guess. Actually, I have found that the response of ortho film to filtration can give beautiful results. Just look in a Kodak master photoguide from the early fifties to get the exposure compensation factors needed. If you use a 2X yellow filter, you expose your 200 number to get the same negative density: e.g. 50. If you use 80 as your starting number, expose at 20 with a 2X yellow. And if you think 20 is too slow, well, that's what tripods are for. Ortho film has a tonality all it's own. I've been shooting it since 1945. I would still be shooting it in rollfilm cameras if it was available.

Jerevan · Apr 16, 2013

I've got one example in my gallery and yes, it is a great film. Unfortunately a bit too expensive for me to burn through loads of it, but I still have one box left in the cupboard. I love its ability to, as Jim says, open up the shadows.

dr5chrome · Apr 16, 2013

We run the ilford-ortho as chrome: http://www.dr5.com/graphics/mush1a.jpg
Its native iso is 20. [image J.Carreon] This is a stunning film.

Ilford Ortho Plus

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency