Pushing FP4+ to 200?

[1kgcoffee]

Hello,
I am about to develop some FP4+ shot at 200. Scene was at a wedding reception, in a darkly lit venue with flash (minolta 8**). Shutter speeds were just fast enough from 1/30 to 1/90. Suffice it to say the kodak gold 200 shots turned out very well, but B&W film is a different beast. I had HP5 on hand but much prefer the look of FP4.

If given the choice between rodinal, d76 and pyrocat HD, what developer would you use, and what times? Stand develop or no?

Thanks in Advance,
-1kgcoffee

 

[Agulliver]

I'm not a fan of stand development so I'd go with D76 (or ID11) at around 10 minutes, two inversions per minute. The FP4+ is likely to gain contrast but you'll get good images. If the Gold 200 shots came out then the FP4+ will too.

Given the fact that you can probably print (or scan) yourself and thereby have control over the final image you could easily shave a minute off the development time and possibly not boost the contrast too much. If shots at ISO200 were well exposed, 125 or 160 aren't going to be bad.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello,
I am about to develop some FP4+ shot at 200. Scene was at a wedding reception, in a darkly lit venue with flash (minolta 8**). Shutter speeds were just fast enough from 1/30 to 1/90. Suffice it to say the kodak gold 200 shots turned out very well, but B&W film is a different beast. I had HP5 on hand but much prefer the look of FP4.

If given the choice between rodinal, d76 and pyrocat HD, what developer would you use, and what times? Stand develop or no?

Thanks in Advance,
-1kgcoffee

I would probably go for D76 or Rodinal,which surprised me with how fine the grain was despite its reputation and follow the suggestions in the 'great development chart', which seems very accurate in most cases. al the best.

 

[awty]

I'm not a fan of stand development so I'd go with D76 (or ID11) at around 10 minutes, two inversions per minute. The FP4+ is likely to gain contrast but you'll get good images. If the Gold 200 shots came out then the FP4+ will too.

Given the fact that you can probably print (or scan) yourself and thereby have control over the final image you could easily shave a minute off the development time and possibly not boost the contrast too much. If shots at ISO200 were well exposed, 125 or 160 aren't going to be bad.

10 minutes seems a little short. I cook mine for 15minutes for @ 200 iso in 1:1 d76. Ten minutes is for around 100 iso. With a flash you may get away with less development times, but I think you will lose a bit of shadow detail.

 

[Willyekerslike]

I shoot FP4+ at 200iso on occasions and develop in ID-11 for 15 minutes, it is the time recomended by Ilford for FP4+ shot at 200iso and I find it gives good negatives for use in the darkroom, so yes I agree with awty.

W.

 

[Billy Axeman]

An obvious choice is FP4+ @ EI 200 in Microphen to keep grain small.

 

[Martin Rickards]

How times have changed. I remember routinely shooting FP4 (not +) at 200 ASA and developing in May and Baker's powder Promicrol (not the Champion version).

 

[Svenedin]

I once made a mistake and loaded FP4 when the camera was set to ISO 400. I developed the FP4 as normal and the photos were OK. So that's a 2 stop (approx) underexposure compared to your one stop. I'm sure you'll be fine.

 

[alentine]

Your big problem will be the flash effect on faces if it was direct.

If given the choice between rodinal, d76

From massive chart, if I'm in your position will base my time/dilution on the following, plus considering the flash effect on faces.
D76 and FP4+ ei 200:
Stock: 10min at 20 deg.
1+1: 15 min at 20 deg.
>>> Will use D76 stock for 13 min at 20deg.
Rodinal and FP4+ ei 200:
1+25: 13 min at 20deg.
1+50: 20 min at 20deg.
>>> Will use Rodinal 1+25, for 17min at 20deg.
Pyrocat HD is only recommended at nominal speed or lower.
Micriphen as mentioned above is the best choice I think, if no flash.
While it could preserve 1/2 stop in the shadows, it increase grain size. Best strategy is to use it stock with just little more time than recommended.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yup. Massive Dev Chart is a great source.

 

[BradS]

Accufine. Follow the instructions on the packaging. Do not use stand development!
Possibly, HC-110 or D-76 straight.

I'd look at the Ilford FP4+ data sheet before anything on the Massive Dev Chart. If I recall correctly, the Mfgr's data sheet has a column for EI200.

 

[Agulliver]

10 minutes seems a little short. I cook mine for 15minutes for @ 200 iso in 1:1 d76. Ten minutes is for around 100 iso. With a flash you may get away with less development times, but I think you will lose a bit of shadow detail.

I use ID11 stock (1+0) for which the recommended time is 10 minutes @ 20C for 200ISO.

If diluting 1+1 then yes, 15 minutes would be appropriate.

 

[alentine]

I use ID11 stock (1+0) for which the recommended time is 10 minutes @ 20C for 200ISO.

If diluting 1+1 then yes, 15 minutes would be appropriate.

Which dilution(1+0, vs 1+1) do you think can preserve more shadow details?
Asking about your observations.
Thanks.

 

[Dali]

Full strength divided D76 (Vestal recipe) + FP4 @ ISO 200 was my "magic" combo years (decades?) ago...

 

[jim appleyard]

If you had Diafine on your menu, that would be great, but D-76 will work. It used to be the standard dev for pushing.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Thanks for all the responses.

I tried to stick to developers that I already have, ended up choosing D76 full strength as it is better for pushing undiluted. Except for the shots which were horribly underexposed I could not be happier. Classic FP4 look. Beautiful negatives. Some quick auto scans:

FP4_036 by Aaron, on Flickr

FP4_003 by Aaron, on Flickr

FP4_021 by Aaron, on Flickr

FP4_024 by Aaron, on Flickr