Wish they'd make it in 4x5
Can't tell about grain in a scan that fits on the screen, really, but clearly you have tones and shadow detail. Shot at box speed?
You use C41? I'm tempted to try Cinestills CS-41 kit with XP2..I love the stuff in 120. Bleach bypass gives me a pretty honest 800 speed film for my folders. Makes f/3.5 seem okay for indoors available light.
Hi Auer,
The image looks great!
Have you tried EI200 and EI100 to get cleaner shadows under direct sunlight too?
I didn't know that film can be developed with B&W developers... Thanks!
Lots of others like @Donald Qualls have experiences as well with XP2 and B&W chems.
It's a different look for sure, the most "un-film like" film I ever used as far a grain goes.Always difficult to judge from a screen but most if not all pics I have seen from XP2 Super in b&w chemicals seem to be pretty grain free. Given that for many b&w is easier to do than C41 then unless the grain is appreciably worse than that of a print from a C41 produced negative then that makes b&w the obvious choice, doesn't it
Interestingly, at least for me, was trawling through the section on Ilford Photo last night that over the space of a couple of years has included stories, articles on XP2 Super being developed in b&w. The pictures on Ilford have to be prints on Ilford paper or at least I haven't seen any on other paper so what the viewer loos at are actual prints, some of which are at 1600 and again while a screen may disguise grain they all looked pretty good to me
pentaxuser
Given that for many b&w is easier to do than C41 then unless the grain is appreciably worse than that of a print from a C41 produced negative then that makes b&w the obvious choice, doesn't it
Here are some 2003 XP2 frames that I took in two old mill buildings in Lewiston, Maine. These were mostly 1-sec. exposures. I recently discovered that the negatives were fading, so something was wrong when they were developed originally (not fixed adequately?).It's a different look for sure, the most "un-film like" film I ever used as far a grain goes.
Gonna try some low light exposures next, when I get a chance.
How was this developed?Here are some 2003 XP2 frames that I took in two old mill buildings in Lewiston, Maine. These were mostly 1-sec. exposures. I recently discovered that the negatives were fading, so something was wrong when they were developed originally (not fixed adequately?).
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2020/10/architecture-from-our-industrial-past.html
I have only used XP2 once since then. It is not my style, but I admire its fine grain.
These were developed in C41 at a local lab (no longer extant).How was this developed?
This reminds me, I need to get some XP2 Super in 120 when I get paid. Been out for a while, and I've been wanting to try it in my BCB pinhole camera (I should put a roll through my Ondu, while I'm waiting...).
I just ordered a bunch in 120, does it dry fairly flat?
Comparing them to Kodak T400CN, the Kodak is deep orange, and as you might guess these negs are like trying to print a safelight.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?