Ilfosol S and HP5+ and FP4+

david b · Dec 27, 2005

Hi,
I am looking for opinions on using Ilfosol S with HP5 and FP4.

I will be using both 35mm and 120 films and I am rather curious how these combos fair.

Thanks.

Sean · Dec 27, 2005

I'm also interested in ilfosol-s and fp4 (35mm) I saw a few shots in the gallery using this combo that I really liked. I contacted those who took the shots but have not heard back yet.

digiconvert · Dec 27, 2005

I have used this conbo (at 1 + 9 for the ilfosol) for my first efforts at developing. I am certainly no expert and you may well be ahead of me in your expectations. I found it very satisfactory (see (there was a url link here which no longer exists)) but I prefer the Delta 100/Ilfosol S I used recently.
Hope this helps .
Cheers CJB

MichaelD · Dec 27, 2005

Ilford developers with FP4 and HP5

I shoot a lot more of these films in medium format than I do in 35 mm, but process them myself in both formats. I used to get good results using Ilfosol S one-shot at 1+14 dilution, but then switched to Ilfotech LC29 which I use at 1+29 dilution (also one-shot). I find that my negatives have better tonal gradation. The processing time is much the same (9 min vs 9 1/2 min) for HP5 rated at EI 400, but longer (12 min vs 9 1/2 min) for FP4 rated at EI 125.
Using the diluted developers also seems to improve the acutance. Also, you can use a plain water rinse or two instead of a stop bath, before fixing.

Ilford's technical data sheet for these developers can be found at: http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/ilfotecd.pdf

Happy processing.

Michael Dunn
Bay Images
Wellington NZ

Quinten · Dec 27, 2005

Although I am not sure about the reasons why I prefered HC110 and Xtol over ilfosol s when I had a little comparison test, ilfosol s seemed a bit dull but this was with apx100 I did use it for FP4 as well but no real comparison test and it's hard to judge different pictures.

cheers!
Quinten

markinlondon · Dec 27, 2005

This gallery contains some shots from earlier this year, the first I used Ilfosol S on. I was quite pleased with the results, but not with the loss of speed with HP5 (about 250 by my estimate). FP4 seemed happy at 100, though. I have now gone back to DD-X for everything, but at the time it wasn't available. All shot on 35mm.

Dead Link Removed

Mark

Sean · Dec 27, 2005

I had trouble sourcing some ilfosol-s local but did find a shop in town that had 8 250ml bottles of ilfotec lc29 in stock, so I grabbed one of those and will try fp4, lc29, 1+29

jmdavis · Dec 27, 2005

With HP5 shot at 400, I use Ilfosol-S for 7.5 minutes. The typical time is 7 but I can use a little extra with all of my cameras (RB67, K1000, Yashica C TLR). I also have used Ilfosol with fp4 in 4x5.. It generally works well. When Ilford was having problems last year, I began to experiement with Pyrocat HD and Forte 200 in 4x5. I haven't shot any 6x7 in the past year, but I would likely continue to use the fp4,hp5, ilfosol-s combo for those since I still have some of each.

Mike Davis

MichaelD · Dec 27, 2005

Sean

Ifosol S seems scarce in Wellington as well. LC29 is more readily available.

MichaelD

gchpaco · Dec 27, 2005

It is widely maintained that Ilfosol S does not perform well with high speed films like HP5+ or Tri-X, but that it's a very nice acutance developer for medium and slower speed films, so you might just want to run FP4+ through it. Since my requirements shift noticably when I start putting 400 speed film in cameras I don't mind this particularly.

ContaxGman · Dec 29, 2005

I have used HP5+ as well as Delta 100 with Ilfosol S quite a bit in the past and was pleased with the results. I now use DDX and like it more - it provides more speed (I can actually shoot these at 400 and 100), less grain, and a better tonality (to my eyes anyhow), but loses some of the acutance that Ilfosol seems to give - that is, the pictures don't look quite as razor sharp. But when I couldn't get DDX this time last year, and if I can't in the future, I did and would gladly use Ilfosol S.

John Bragg · Dec 30, 2005

gchpaco said:
It is widely maintained that Ilfosol S does not perform well with high speed films like HP5+ or Tri-X, but that it's a very nice acutance developer for medium and slower speed films, so you might just want to run FP4+ through it. Since my requirements shift noticably when I start putting 400 speed film in cameras I don't mind this particularly.

In my experience,Ilfosol-s is a good performer with Tri-x when rated at 200asa. Not first choice for speed enhancement and pushing techniques, but tonally excellent when used sensibly. For FP4 it would be an excellent choice.

Ilfosol S and HP5+ and FP4+

david b

Sean

Admin

digiconvert

MichaelD

Quinten

markinlondon

Sean

Admin

jmdavis

MichaelD

gchpaco

ContaxGman

John Bragg

Ilfosol S and HP5+ and FP4+

Admin

Admin

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency