Ortho Plus 80 - Developing tips?

M-88 · Nov 15, 2019

Hello

I have finally got my first roll of the latest stock. I've heard Orthos can be developed with deep red light on. Are there any precautions I should take? It would be interesting to see what happens with film during the development. Childish, I know

I would also appreciate the experience from users for contrast control etc. via agitation. Is there anything different when processing Ortho film compared to Panchro?

Thanks in advance

pentaxuser · Nov 15, 2019

The problem at the moment is, I suspect, lack of user experience and even when there are a few this may not be enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. However in the meantime and unless you want to wait weeks or months I'd consult the Ilford process instruction sheets which covers safelight requirements and stick with those. You could be the first to report back on your findings which I hope you will

pentaxuser

Rick A · Nov 15, 2019

I used a couple of packs of 4x5 a couple of years ago, It's FP4+ without red sensitizer. Read and follow the Ilford specs.

M-88 · Nov 16, 2019

It being FP4-ish is a good news, because it's the film I use the most.

As for the safeligt, datasheet specifies "Ilford 906" safelight which seems to be rather expensive. It is also stated that I should keep safelight usage to a minimum, so I guess there's always a risk of fogging?

Fritzthecat · Nov 16, 2019

You can use a dark red safelight, I went total black out, no safelight.

Ian Grant · Nov 16, 2019

Rick A said:
I used a couple of packs of 4x5 a couple of years ago, It's FP4+ without red sensitizer. Read and follow the Ilford specs.

Simon Galley said it wasn't FP4 with different sensitisers, however in practice it's very close, I used hundreds of boxes for work.

Ian

Tom Kershaw · Nov 16, 2019

I'm not sure when I'd use the Ortho Plus film for general photography (e.g 35mm or 120) unless I had a particular application for the sheet film.

Ian Grant · Nov 16, 2019

Tom Kershaw said:
I'm not sure when I'd use the Ortho Plus film for general photography (e.g 35mm or 120) unless I had a particular application for the sheet film.

I have to admit I've no use for Ortho Plus in 120 or 35mm, that's despite using a lot of 5x4 up until 1986 - it was just Ilford Ortho or an SO version then. It's the best film around for making copy negatives, copying B&W artwork etc . However it's also good for that pre 1906/7 orthochromatic look particularly with portrits.

The demand for a 35mm and 120 film like this has been met by companies like Maco and Rollei but probably not of the quality of Ortho Plus.

Ian

Tom Kershaw · Nov 16, 2019

Ian Grant said:
The demand for a 35mm and 120 film like this has been met by companies like Maco and Rollei but probably not of the quality of Ortho Plus.

Ian

I experienced some absurdly poor service and quality control product from Maco / Rollei (RPX 25 that wasn't..., actually wrongly confectioned orthro 25) so I can appreciate that those wanting ortho film now have a better option.

M-88 · Nov 17, 2019

Fritzthecat said:
You can use a dark red safelight, I went total black out, no safelight.

I would do total blackout as usual, but I really want to see how film is being developed. That's the whole point of me buying Ortho film.

Ian Grant said:
The demand for a 35mm and 120 film like this has been met by companies like Maco and Rollei but probably not of the quality of Ortho Plus.

Ian

Thank you for your input! I think it is important that new film is rated 80, almost two stops faster than existing Ortho stock. Could make life easier for those amateurs who are unwilling to carry a tripod everywhere they go. Plus it's Ilford, how bad can it be in terms of quality?

Hunter_Compton · Nov 20, 2019

HI, I shot some of this film recently and came across your post. Mine was 120 and I actually tray developed it for 6 min. in HC-110 Dil. B (1:31) at 68F. Came out well.

I used a Kodak brownie darkroom lamp with the red cup, keep it at least 4' from the film and you should have no fogging issues. They're also dirt cheap ($5-10).

M-88 · Nov 21, 2019

Hunter_Compton said:
HI, I shot some of this film recently and came across your post. Mine was 120 and I actually tray developed it for 6 min. in HC-110 Dil. B (1:31) at 68F. Came out well.

I used a Kodak brownie darkroom lamp with the red cup, keep it at least 4' from the film and you should have no fogging issues. They're also dirt cheap ($5-10).

Pretty much every manufacturer states to keep the light several feet away from the film, Ilford has it in its leaflet as well, so I'll make sure to follow the rule on this one. And Kodak Brownie darkroom lamp? It's the first time ever that I consider buying something called "Kodak Brownie". Sounds like a bargain!

On a completely different note, a clickbait appeared on my feed today. It showed that Ortho + 80 has an actually noticeable difference in final image when shot with orange filter. I could never see any difference with regular films.

Anon Ymous · Nov 22, 2019

What do you mean you could never see any difference with regular films? All films are blue sensitive and the yellow, orange, red filters remove the blue wavelengths of the image and progressively more towards red, or perhaps greatly attenuate their intensity. Blue skies get darker with any of these. An orange filter with such a film is probably a bit marginal, it has a cutoff point at about the edge of the film's spectral sensitivity.

M-88 · Nov 22, 2019

Anon Ymous said:
What do you mean you could never see any difference with regular films? All films are blue sensitive and the yellow, orange, red filters remove the blue wavelengths of the image and progressively more towards red, or perhaps greatly attenuate their intensity. Blue skies get darker with any of these. An orange filter with such a film is probably a bit marginal, it has a cutoff point at about the edge of the film's spectral sensitivity.

I mean that even with 2 stop red filter I saw just a negligible difference in final image, compared to unfiltered. And the difference is meager with other colours too, even less than with red. Of course I'm not talking about portraits.

P.S. It's always good to see Syd.

Anon Ymous · Nov 22, 2019

M-88 said:
I mean that even with 2 stop red filter I saw just a negligible difference in final image, compared to unfiltered. And the difference is meager with other colours too, even less than with red. Of course I'm not talking about portraits.

P.S. It's always good to see Syd.

Ah, ok, you see a difference, but not what you'd expect to see. This can be subjective, but given something like a nice, deep blue sky, I can see an obvious difference.

PS Nice to see another Syd Barrett fan here.

M-88 · Nov 22, 2019

Anon Ymous said:
Ah, ok, you see a difference, but not what you'd expect to see. This can be subjective, but given something like a nice, deep blue sky, I can see an obvious difference.

Yes, exactly. As I did my research a few years ago, I read that red filters would darken the sky. But guess what? Not as much as it was shown to. Orange and yellow had even less effect. Blue filter had the biggest effect, however it cuts off red and yellow and I don't find much use for it. Perhaps with some flowers, if I want to give them unnatural, dark look. So up until now my use of filters is primarily reserved to near IR film.

Ortho Plus 80 - Developing tips?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency