Ilford XP2

drmoss_ca · May 11, 2020

John Wiegerink said:
..........do you think Diafine is about as good as it gets for XP2S?

It's certainly the simplest, but HC-110 gives the flexibilty of using it at all sorts of speeds. I haven't tried the new version of HC-110 as I have a couple of bottles of the old. I have used Ilfotec-HC and L110, and they may be more closely related to the new formula than the old - I guess no one knows.

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
I second this. Your work and my own experiments with this film has convinced me that XP2 Super is a fantastic film for use as a traditional B&W film. My only regret is it's not available in large format.

Agreed. It would be a wonderful thing to see an 8x10 XP2 negative! Given that chromogenic films were invented to allow the amateur photographer who was using a High Street minilab for development to continue using B&W film, I can see that Ilford wouldn't think there would be a market for it as sheet film. It wouldn't hurt them to cut up some of their giant rolls of film as part of the annual sheet film sale.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 11, 2020

drmoss_ca said:
I can see that Ilford wouldn't think there would be a market for it as sheet film. It wouldn't hurt them to cut up some of their giant rolls of film as part of the annual sheet film sale.

At some point in time, XP2 was available in sheet format. Given how versatile the film is in C41, I wonder why it was discontinued.

thuggins · May 13, 2020

It makes beautiful positives if developed in E6 chemistry. I have posted the details here in the past.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 13, 2020

thuggins said:
It makes beautiful positives if developed in E6 chemistry. I have posted the details here in the past.

Tim: did u get cyan cast in the positives as several people who processed XP2 Super in E6 have reported? If it is not too much of a trouble, can you share some examples of your XP2 positives?

thuggins · May 13, 2020

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-negative-b-w-film.167857/page-2#post-2186435

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/two-rolls-a-week.159617/#post-2104111

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/e6-like-black-and-white.148695/#post-1948746

Scroll down to my posts. There are sample images in each of them.

As for the "cyan cast", I have never processed it as a negative so I don't know if a negative would have a different color cast than the positives. Remember that XP2 is a color film, not a B&W film. It's just that it only has one color dye. I do sometimes get some shifting from a bluish grey (the most common result) to a green, but have not identified a pattern. In every case, though, it makes very nice monochrome trannies.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 13, 2020

thuggins said:
Scroll down to my posts. There are sample images in each of them.

These are very nice results. The greenish colour could be due to E6 second developer. Have you tried using C41 developer as the second developer with XP2 (similar to what @earlz did with E6 film)?
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-6-transparencies-with-c-41-chemicals.160510/

fs999 · May 15, 2020

Caffenol CL(CS) works well with XP2 !

Donald Qualls · May 15, 2020

Okay, I give up -- I'm ordering some (gotta wait until I get home, can't remember my Freestyle password). Got 5 rolls each, 35mm and 120, in my cart. May try reversing the 35mm. Must remember to add a box of slide mounts to my order...

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 15, 2020

fs999 said:
Caffenol CL(CS) works well with XP2 !

That's a nice result! Did you shoot at box speed?

FWIW Obsidian Aqua, a Catechol based staining developer, also works well with XP2 Super.

thuggins · May 15, 2020

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
These are very nice results. The greenish colour could be due to E6 second developer. Have you tried using C41 developer as the second developer with XP2 (similar to what @earlz did with E6 film)?
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-6-transparencies-with-c-41-chemicals.160510/

All of the ones I've done have been with a Tetenal E-6 kit. The color shifting seems random; at least I've never noticed a pattern. It does seem odd as I would expect the reaction to be consistent, but they give a really unique image in any case. So I've really never cared much one way or the other. I assume that the bluish-grey (which is the typical look) is the way the negatives would come out.

fs999 said:
Caffenol CL(CS) works well with XP2 !

So you just develop the silver image as a regular negative? How do you clear out the unused dye couplers?

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 16, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
May try reversing the 35mm. Must remember to add a box of slide mounts to my order...

Reversal using E6/C41? Or b&w film reversal?

Donald Qualls · May 16, 2020

Most likely reversal with HC-110 or Dektol first dev (have to look back at my notes from B&W reversal to recall which one worked better), light exposure fogging, and C-41 color dev. That should give a positive that looks like an XP2 Super negative.

fs999 · May 18, 2020

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
That's a nice result! Did you shoot at box speed?

Yes. I have also excellent results @200 and @100 !

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 18, 2020

fs999 said:
I have also excellent results @200 and @100 !

Don't be shy to post those results here.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 19, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
That should give a positive that looks like an XP2 Super negative.

XP2 Super negative usually has a pinkish brown colour. While that colour is harmless for negatives, it would make the positive less than desirable. You may need a stronger bleach than C41 bleach to get rid of the colour.

Donald Qualls · May 19, 2020

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
XP2 Super negative usually has a pinkish brown colour. While that colour is harmless for negatives, it would make the positive less than desirable. You may need a stronger bleach than C41 bleach to get rid of the colour.

Hmmm. I was planning to process at least one roll as negatives before I try reversing it -- but I guess it has to have some level of masking to print on regular RA-4 paper. If that's like regular C-41 mask, different bleach won't help much.

MattKing · May 19, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
Hmmm. I was planning to process at least one roll as negatives before I try reversing it -- but I guess it has to have some level of masking to print on regular RA-4 paper. If that's like regular C-41 mask, different bleach won't help much.

XP2 has no orange mask, and prints okay, but not easily on colour RA-4 paper.
The Kodak version, when it was made, incorporated an orange mask, and printed relatively easily on colour RA-4 paper.
In a world where most labs scan and print from scans, the orange mask in the Kodak version essentially lost its value for the mini-lab market - it is no longer made.

abruzzi · May 19, 2020

I haven't tried XP2+, but I had an old roll of XP1 and some Kodak rolls (I forget which one specifically) that I tried processing in E6 chemistry (exposed at 100). They all has a pretty significant green color that would be problematic if your goal was to project. If you're scanning, not so much...

fs999 · May 20, 2020

Pentax 645N • Pentax 67 105mm f:2.4
Pentax 67 to 645 original adapter
Ilford XP2 Super @200 ISO developed in Caffenol C-L 70min stand @ 20°C

Agfa Super Isolette • Agfa Solinar 1:3.5/75mm
Ilford XP2 Super 400 @100 ISO developed in Caffenol CLCS (Cold Start) stand 75min @ 15-20°C

Raghu Kuvempunagar · May 20, 2020

Very nice!

fs999 · May 22, 2020

thuggins said:
So you just develop the silver image as a regular negative? How do you clear out the unused dye couplers?

Sorry, didn't see your question...

I don't know, I suppose they are removed by the fixer, but it works very well...

cptrios · Mar 8, 2021

Ok extremely stupid question to resurrect this thread - I've processed one roll of this in HC-110 (@400) and quite liked the results. I've heard tell that you can expose at several different speeds on the same roll if processing in C-41 chemicals. Can the same be said for HC-110, with results within reason? It seems doubtful, but who knows. I could, of course, try it out myself...I just wish it were like $1 cheaper!

pentaxuser · Mar 8, 2021

campy51 said:
Here is one of the better ones
.View attachment 245814

Can you show us the worse ones? When you said initially that it was promising and then disappointing on the same day did something changed as it dried or was it as simple as not being able to examine all the frames?. Given the pic of the plants does seem to suggest that the processing went well as it can't and thus won't have distinguished between frames.

pentaxuser

M Carter · Mar 8, 2021

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
Cut a small strip of 3-4 frames from the roll in total darkness and develop only this strip for, say, 10 minutes. Analyse the resulting negatives and based on your findings, increase/decrease development time appropriately for the rest of the roll.

I do this to test developers often - but I find that very short strips mean that agitation is waaaay more efficient - if my normal agitation is 5 seconds every 60, I just pick up the tank every 60 seconds and give it a couple gentle tilts. I've gotten crazy surge marks if I don't do it that way! I tend to do a third of a roll of 35 for tests, so I can throw in some brackets for ISO.

RalphLambrecht · Mar 8, 2021

chriscrawfordphoto said:
You will get the best results giving it C-41 processing. That is what it was designed for.

That said, 20 yr old film is not going to give great results no matter how much extra exposure you give it. Spend $6 and buy a new roll of film!

+1

Ilford XP2

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency