Organizing notes, what are five things I need to include in my FP4 and HP5+ folders?

As a teenager, in photo knowledge age, I just got around to better organize my notes.

I will mostly stick to FP4 and HP5+ from here on, and try to apply myself to "learn" both.

What would you say are the five essential things to have as reference for each of these two emulsions, 35mm and 120 versions, beyond Ilford's own material.

Better developer, all-around EI, these sort of things I need on hand before they burn into mechanical memory down the road!

Note that I already collected sizable bits of information on the forum, using it as a knowledge base. It is just that I need to pare it down to essentials. I can get to the fine-tuning later.

So much of that is personal preference. I would start by trying different developers to see what you like as well as determining your personal ISO rating for those films.

I would suggest you try different developers for different situations/Styles. For example a developers for portraits that produce a certain grain, another for landscapes, etc.

The same for different formats. Example, I wont use rodinal with HP5+ on 35mm but I like the resulta I get for 120.

I think you are over thinking this. I mostly shoot FP4 in 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 plus 35mm and 120. I shoot HP5 or TMax 400 when I need something faster. (HP5 pushes better.) My goal is to simplify so I've settled on mostly shooting FP4+ in all formats and developing only with HC-110. The differences are subtle enough that most people looking at my images would never see any difference, so I don't sweat it. My goal is to have fun and create images.


Kent in SD

My method is to write down the type of film, the EI that I shot it at, the date, and which camera and lens took the pics (noting whether or not it had a red or yellow filter on the lens, if any). Then I write down the film developer choice, and the times used to develop it. This is all written on the print files in black marker. Everything is always developed around the same temp, so I don't need to record that.

In the darkroom, I'll write in the print border the date and the exposure info. This lets me look at the print and decide if something needs to be changed on the next print. That part is impossible to know until the print has dried, when they're wet they all look beautiful. But they're not.

Two23 said:

I think you are over thinking this. I mostly shoot FP4 in 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 plus 35mm and 120. I shoot HP5 or TMax 400 when I need something faster. (HP5 pushes better.) My goal is to simplify so I've settled on mostly shooting FP4+ in all formats and developing only with HC-110. The differences are subtle enough that most people looking at my images would never see any difference, so I don't sweat it. My goal is to have fun and create images.


Kent in SD

Click to expand...

Since you used Tmax 400, why don't you use Tmax 100 for slower shooting?

All you need to know about developers is replenished XTOL.

Alan Edward Klein said:

Since you used Tmax 400, why don't you use Tmax 100 for slower shooting?

Click to expand...

Alan, if it all came down to one film, I'd settle on FP4+ as well. In all the sheet film formats as well as 120, it's particularly brilliant. Maybe in 35mm TMax has an edge in grain, but FP4+.....works in any kind of lighting. Great results in just about any developer (not as finicky as TMax 100). Beautiful contrast. Bets are it will be in production when TMax is gone. Often not an issue, but it is less expensive too. (& I do like TMX).

GregY said:

Alan, if it all came down to one film, I'd settle on FP4+ as well. In all the sheet film formats as well as 120, it's particularly brilliant. Maybe in 35mm TMax has an edge in grain, but FP4+.....works in any kind of lighting. Great results in just about any developer (not as finicky as TMax 100). Beautiful contrast. Bets are it will be in production when TMax is gone. Often not an issue, but it is less expensive too. (& I do like TMX).

Click to expand...

Although I'm hooked at the moment at Adox CHS ii, I tend to agree. Adox has become more expensive now and when my CHS ii box is empty I might step over to FP4+, it's 2€ cheaper in a 25pack too. And my FX39ii will be just as nice as with other films I trust.

GregY said:

Alan, if it all came down to one film, I'd settle on FP4+ as well. In all the sheet film formats as well as 120, it's particularly brilliant. Maybe in 35mm TMax has an edge in grain, but FP4+.....works in any kind of lighting. Great results in just about any developer (not as finicky as TMax 100). Beautiful contrast. Bets are it will be in production when TMax is gone. Often not an issue, but it is less expensive too. (& I do like TMX).

Click to expand...

The reason I asked is that I'm new to BW photography. I've used Tmax 100 and Tmax 400. 400 is slightly more grainy but the extra speed is nice when it's a little windy and the trees are moving. I shoot landscapes on a tripod 98% of the time with either a medium format 6x7 or 4x5 LF camera. I also send the film out for development at a pro lab. I don;t have a darkroom.

I'm trying to understand the differences and maybe decide to settle on one emulsion or another for convenience.

Alan Edward Klein said:

The reason I asked is that I'm new to BW photography. I've used Tmax 100 and Tmax 400. 400 is slightly more grainy but the extra speed is nice when it's a little windy and the trees are moving. I shoot landscapes on a tripod 98% of the time with either a medium format 6x7 or 4x5 LF camera. I also send the film out for development at a pro lab. I don;t have a darkroom.

I'm trying to understand the differences and maybe decide to settle on one emulsion or another for convenience.

Click to expand...

Alan, in sheet film. 4x5, 5x7 I've had great results with Tri-X and TMax400.... the grain has never been an issue in prints. In medium format the ISO 100 films are the charm...in prints up to 20x24." When I'm using 35mm....I come to embrace the grain....and shrug my shoulders & accept that 'it is what it is.' Sometimes getting the image is what counts. All that said, FP4+ has proven itself to be the reliable one.....& if i had to just use one film....that would be my default.

As is sometimes my want, I'm going to respond to your question with a question back.
What is it you want your notes to do for you?
For example, are you hoping to improve your metering? Are you seeking to maximize economy? Are you looking for a particular type of response? Do you want to be able to find examples? etc

1) A good note book, like a Moleskine, but better paper for using a pen, never pencil, which is self erasing by way of the paper, an abrasive.

2) A workflow page for each camera type, 135, 120, Instant films, rangefinder, SLR, point and shoot, disposable cameras, pinholes, etc and any readings from digital "proofing" meter reading or Sunny 11, so you do no forget details to look over.

3) ISO & metering, including scene lighting, filter factors, types (Wratten index) and deviations from original meter readings, including decisions on future development.

Make sure you note changes to box speed for film materials, are including paper negatives or positives.

4) Shot data for roll, sheet, frames (if notable)

When possible meter off grey card or palm and note reading.

Topic or Subject's name, place, photo type, ie. Environmental Portrait, Street Photography, Night scenes, landscape, etc, even GPS data.

5) to be continued...

MattKing said:

As is sometimes my want, I'm going to respond to your question with a question back.
What is it you want your notes to do for you?
For example, are you hoping to improve your metering? Are you seeking to maximize economy? Are you looking for a particular type of response? Do you want to be able to find examples? etc

Click to expand...

I want to gather and have on hand the core starting points (the accepted common wisdom) with each FP4 and HP5+, and some don'ts, in exposure, development.
Maybe I should lighten up and extract data out of the Ilford material, and just sprinkle in some stuff I would or have found here.

jay moussy said:

I want to gather and have on hand the core starting points (the accepted common wisdom) with each FP4 and HP5+, and some don'ts, in exposure, development.
Maybe I should lighten up and extract data out of the Ilford material, and just sprinkle in some stuff I would or have found here.

Click to expand...

You can't decide that much in advance. It's going to grow from your own experience. There are few "starting points", not that much "accepted common wisdom," little "do's and don'ts" other than your own. What I shoot at box speed you may prefer 1/2 step under. What I like underdeveloped you might like slightly overdeveloped. I like grain, you may prefer a solvent developer. My "meh" film/development combo may be your "wow" film development combo. This goes on and on.

The only advice you'll ever need, that you can write down on the top page of your notebook, is "trust your own eyes." That doesn't mean not listening to advice or noting other people's experiences, but these are so varied and different one from the other that you may just end up with folder after folder of contradicting opinions (the "stand development is great!"/"stand development is worthless and for lazy bums!" syndrome ).

My advice, therefore, is keep it simple. If you're not already sure what you like about these two films, in which developer you like it best, according to which situation (portrait, street, landscape, etc.), stick to the basics. My notes on all films have "normal" development times for the three types of developers I use, solvent (Xtol, ID-11 and D-23 at stock or 1:1 dilution), non-solvent (Rodinal and Ilfotec HC at various dilution, D-23 and Xtol at 1:3), high-definition (FX-2) and staining (Pyrocat HD and510 Pyro). I've added notes on the general effect of each developer, not opinions but scientifically oriented notes, notably which impact each has on speed, on contrast, which has a compensating effect, etc. All this stuff can already be found in books such as The Film Development Cookbook, but I like to keep brief summaries.

After that, as I said, notes become a record of what you see, and what you like, depending on various situations. The idea, contrary to what is often written here, is not to endlessly experiment, but to slowly narrow the process down to what suits you for the type of photography you do and the type of visual experience you want others to have.

jay moussy said:

I want to gather and have on hand the core starting points (the accepted common wisdom) with each FP4 and HP5+, and some don'ts, in exposure, development.
Maybe I should lighten up and extract data out of the Ilford material, and just sprinkle in some stuff I would or have found here.

Click to expand...

For exposure, noting the specific apertures and shutter speeds won't tell you much.
What will help is recording which meter you used, which EI you set it to, and most importantly how you metered - incident or reflected, how you positioned the meter and where it was pointed, whether you incorporated any built in metering functions - and how you interpreted the results and applied them.
Some thing like: "EI 320, reflected mode, walked up to 5 feet from the rock, pointed at the centre of the rock, added 1 stop because in the print the rock should be about one Zone lighter than Zone V mid-grey".
For development, its similar. The exact time and temperature and agitation isn't important, it is how you vary from your "standard. That means that you will need to standardize on a regular time/temperature and agitation combination for each developer and dilution you use - I would suggest the manufacturer's recommendation. Then for each film, you just need to record the developer and dilution used and how you varied from the standard. Something like "X-Tol 1+1, + 10% time. Regular agitation."

I took notes to help me initially establish my preferred ISO for my preferred film, HP5+. Once I established the ISO and developing time for my preferred developer and dilution (Rodinal), I only keep notes about print times.

You would get an excellent start by looking at a series by John Finch on Youtube Pictorial Planet . Start with two articles, the first is determining your personal film speed setting, then the next builds on that and is finding your correct developing time for that film and developer combination.
You will most probably find your personal settings and times are a fair bit out from the manufacturers stated information.

Not sure if your questions include what sort of records to keep. I carry a small rough notebook and just keep details of the camera used, film name, my film speed (found by experiment as in the above videos) dates and locations. It becomes a bit of a chore detailing every aperture and speed so unless it is an experiment they are not entered. Any filters used go down in the notebook as well.

As for the darkroom, two hardbacked books are kept for prints, one for colour and one for black and white.
Not all prints are entered, but any that will possibly be printed again have the lens, head height, aperture, time, and filtration for multigrade or colour recorded. Date printed, negative file number, frame number and who they are for.
I also have a numbering system that goes on the back of a print so I can find the negative and reprint it quickly at a later date.

Each negative file has a sequential number, date developed, developer and film used and iso. More details locations etc are on the back of the contact sheet.

Sounds like a lot of record keeping, but as it is not all done at the same time it is not a problem.

Reciprocity response.