Pushing HP5+ to 3200

[sepiareverb]

he would have had you do film tests for 3 weeks line up your negatives and tell him which exposures were which.
he would have had you make the film grid
and then he would have had you do it again.
and then he would have had you make prints of everything so you understood what
under exposed + under developed ( or whatever) negatives LOOKED LIKE and printed like

That is much how I learned, at the hand of Paul Krot, who started Sprint. Making those prints was excruciating, but I became very precise and keep very good notes to this day, nearly thirty years later.

 

[removed account4]

That is much how I learned, at the hand of Paul Krot, who started Sprint. Making those prints was excruciating, but I became very precise and keep very good notes to this day, nearly thirty years later.

wow, you worked with paul krot?!
that guy was one of the nicest people that walked
this planet ! he helped me get dichroic fog off some film
after kodak gave me bad advice ( which gave me the fog ), and then they left me out to dry.


learning photography that way sticks with you. its like learning multiplication tables
some things never get forgotten

 

[StoneNYC]

I'm going to keep trying to help answer questions in Stone's threads even though I don't currently have any pictures in the gallery. I've been a little tough on him but I think it might be because Chris Lange seems to have changed his avatar, which threw me off or something.

Thanks, I know I'm a PITA sometimes but I tend towards doing things differently than most. Look forward to seeing some of your work someday.

 

[Xmas]

I simply don't understand why Stone seems to think he is above learning from his own mistakes. First hand experience with both error and success is what allows you to excel...not someone, whether it be in a book, or on a website, or in person, telling you what to do. We have provided a book's worth of advice to you already Stone, not only on the topics you specifically ask about, but on ancillary issues that become apparent down the road. So while you want us to tell you what to do, you also don't want us to tell you what to do.

This ought to cover the general gist of things:
[video=vimeo;11064775]http://vimeo.com/11064775[/video]

Some people learn from other people's mistakes, some people don't learn from their own mistakes.

Donno who said that and I might not have it accurate/exact.

 

[StoneNYC]

Some people learn from other people's mistakes, some people don't learn from their own mistakes.

Donno who said that and I might not have it accurate/exact.

+1

 

[removed account4]

nevermind

 

[sepiareverb]

wow, you worked with paul krot?!
that guy was one of the nicest people that walked
this planet !

He was indeed. And one of the smarter ones.

 

[markbarendt]

nevermind

+1

 

[StoneNYC]

I never posted results, but they were spectacular! HP5+ in DD-X 20 minutes... (This was hand inversion before I went rotary so times will change hopefully results won't).

Shot in 127 format on my Yashila44LM but some cropped as planned.

 

[Amosk]

What would you do differently?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hey everyone!

So all the literature from Ilford States that HP5+ can be pushed to 3200.

I'm wondering if it's like D3200 where you have to develop for the next stop up, IE shoot at 3200 and Dev for 6400...

Or if accurate times are listed and no additional time is needed?

The time in DD-X for HP5+ shot and pushed to 3200 is 20 minutes.

Additionally, with such a long agitation scheme, should I extend the agitations themselves, as in only agitating every two minutes for example instead of every minute? Or any other thing like that? I know that this is something that is safe if I were using Rodinal, but I'm not sure about DD-X and bromide drag after 50-60 seconds of sitting.

Thanks for any help.

And PLEASE I ask two things, 1 only speak up if you've actually done this, and not just something you've read somewhere. And 2. Please don't suggest some other film / dev combo, first, HP5+ is the only pushable to 3200 film that exists in 4x5 and the ONLY pushable to 3200 film available in 127 (heck it's the ONLY B&W film period that I can get new for 127) so I am only working with this film, I have no D3200 to use... And would PREFER to stick to DD-X since I have it on hand and it's excellent for pushing. I won't CONSIDER another liquid developer even if it's some kind of magic because my father is coming over today, and I will be developing this role with him as a father-son event, and DD-X is really the only developer I have good for pushing, I do have Rodinal but that's not such a good option with such a huge push, and D-76 isn't mixed and I don't want to have to try and mix 5 gallons or whatever the stupid huge amount is required per bag, so DD-X is it please...

Thanks guys, sorry for the "hard rules" but we all know this forum and trying to avoid all the "oh you should do this completely other thing that you're not asking about" thing that happens here LOL

PLUS the film is already shot, so, it's more about getting the times/agitation right...

Thanks!

I've actually done this and followed the massive dev chart with regtular developers withy much success. the beauty of HP5+ is that it doesn't get too contrasty with extended development.

 

[Agulliver]

A couple of months ago I discovered a local music club, where the owner and bands are more than happy for photography to take place. I've been shooting some HP5+ and pushing to 3200, often shooting 1/8 or 1/15 second at f2.8 because the lighting is very low. Indeed the wall behind the small stage is lit much more than the artists performing.

I tend to process for 19 minutes @20C, or shave off a minute or two if it's warmer....two inversions every minute in Ilford ID-11.

Here are a few from the last two weeks....Henri Herbert & band, and the Seby Ntege band. Yashica Minster III camera used in both cases.

I have also experimented with Delta 3200, and actually prefer the contrast afforded by pushing HP5+

 

[removed account4]

>sigh< this thread makes me sad.

 

[Agulliver]

>sigh< this thread makes me sad.

I apologise if I've added to your sadness by sharing some pictures.

 

[removed account4]

I apologise if I've added to your sadness by sharing some pictures.

No, your pix are fantastic! I saw the OP's pix too, good to see he was able to get things to work for him -
Its too bad the thread was so contentious and difficult, and so many of the responders are vanished..

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I think some left and one banned... I sure am impressed with Stone's results, though. If you told me those images had been pushed to 3200 from 400, I would never believe you. HP5 certainly is a wonderful film for pushing...

 

[Colin Corneau]

I've actually done this and followed the massive dev chart with regtular developers withy much success. the beauty of HP5+ is that it doesn't get too contrasty with extended development.

This has been my experience, too. I actually find HP5+ at 400 to be too 'grey' or flat for most of my shooting, and often push it a stop just to give it a little bump.

It just seems to be such a reliable, workhorse film --- you can always rely on it.

 

[pentaxuser]

I suppose the key question here is: Can HP5+ be pushed to 3200 without excessive contrast and match the range of tones that either D3200 or Kodak P3200 will give? Certainly both D3200 and P3200 do not show in my experience, excessive contrast at EI3200 but given the much lower price of HP5+ in the U.K. at least and its good box speed for most light conditions then HP5+, if it matches or even comes close to matching D3200 or P3200 at 3200 would appear to square the proverbial circle and can be obtained in bulk rolls as well.

I recall many years ago when starting out in film photography buying P3200 for the Isle of Man TT races. When the bikes are passing at 150-180 mph speed is important and it was good for that, However shooting ordinary scenes meant that I was running out of high enough shutter speeds even with in some case a red filter. The red was a rescue method really and far from ideal for some of the shots. Yes I could have used a ND but that's another filer to buy and carry. How much better if I had had short rolls of HP5+ from bulk whose speed matched the scenes.

On the other hand high contrast negs if that is what HP5+ pushed to 3200 gives are not ideal either

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

or maybe another question could be, can hp5+ be pushed to 3200 and printed using traditional materials, or might one get better results by using it as a internegative for hybrid technology? either way its a great film.. !

 

[warden]

I suppose the key question here is: Can HP5+ be pushed to 3200 without excessive contrast and match the range of tones that either D3200 or Kodak P3200 will give? Certainly both D3200 and P3200 do not show in my experience, excessive contrast at EI3200 but given the much lower price of HP5+ in the U.K. at least and its good box speed for most light conditions then HP5+, if it matches or even comes close to matching D3200 or P3200 at 3200 would appear to square the proverbial circle and can be obtained in bulk rolls as well.

pentaxuser

That's where I'm at with pushing as well. The only reason (for me) to push a slow film is if I don't have any fast film handy. If I know I'll be shooting beyond iso1000 I'll be using P3200 or Delta 3200.

 

[Sirius Glass]

How much is the development time expanded compared to box speed to get ISO 3200 out of HP5+?

 

[pentaxuser]

How much is the development time expanded compared to box speed to get ISO 3200 out of HP5+?

In Microphen which is the only Ilford developer that Ilford quotes for a push to 3200. it is almost 250% ie. at stock, Microphen is 6.5 mins @400 and 16 mins@3200

I remain on the horns of a dilemma on this one. I have tried D3200 at 1600 but not 3200 and not in Microphen. However in both Xtol and DDX it was fine. No problem with contrast. I have tried P3200 @3200 in ID11( probably not the best for P3200) and again it was OK.

I have never pushed HP5+ but have seen shots from others that looked quite acceptable. They were mainly indoor night-time shots under artificial light similar to Agulliver and there was a good deal of contrast which is OK in such shots where the scene is a kind of high contrast light and dark scenario. What would interest me would be outdoor low light/ dusk scenes or high shutter speed action shots in both HP5+ and D3200, ideally of similar scenes or better still, the same scene in the same light.

If its a one stop push to 800 or even 1250 which will cover a lot of light conditions then I have little doubt that HP5+ will cope. Beyond that I do entertain doubts. It may well be a question of suck it and see for myself. As I said HP5+ benefits from being available in bulk so film can be tailored accordingly in terms of no. of frames and in the U.K. it is a lot cheaper than D3200 or P3200.

It is just over 200% in Xtol stock when moving from 400 to 3200( 8.5 mins to 17.5 mins.) Ilford has 8 mins and 19 mins respectively for Xtol stock so again Ilford's increase for HP5+ in Xtol is almost 240% or only slightly less than the increase in time percentage-wise for Microphen

pentaxuser

pentaxuser

 

[Tom Kershaw]

The ILFORD times for Delta 3200 / XTOL are significantly too short in my experience. I've had good results with ID-68 but haven't yet put the time into ironing out any strong recommendations.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The ILFORD times for Delta 3200 / XTOL are significantly too short in my experience. I've had good results with ID-68 but haven't yet put the time into ironing out any strong recommendations.

That is what I found the hard way.

 

[Agulliver]

I have experimented at the music venue with D3200 as well, and I feel I prefer HP5+ pushed....but then I am looking for a certain amount of grain and high contrast. I did make traditional prints from some shots I made at a gig in 2016 on HP5+ pushed to 1600 and was able to get more detail in the shadows than I was scanning at the time (though I now have a better scanner so who knows). You certainly can print the negatives you get from pushing HP5+ three stops. I do get my HP5+ in 100 foot rolls, which results in much reduced costs compared to buying HP5+ in 24 or 36 exposure cassettes and is seriously cheaper than D3200. Where I have enjoyed D3200 in this specific scenario is in a 6x6 folder with an f3.5 lens.

I use ID11 and 19 minutes with two inversions every 60 seconds, or if the weather is hot (as it has been this week) i might use 17 minutes. What I've noticed with HP5+ is that the additional time to go from 1600 to 3200 is quite a lot, as much as six minutes, so it's not necessarily critical that one gets it exactly right. I'd also suggest trying Microphen - though this is only something I've done once. I'd need to do more experiments with Microphen to be sure but I *think* it resulted in less grain and a little less contrast.

On another occasion I shot some photos on a very sunny day near the Tower of London using HP5+ which I was pushing to 1600. High shutter speeds, small apertures of course....and high contrast but pleasing images which could be tamed with the right printing filters. I used the same roll later in the evening for night shots hence the pushing....and during the day I was looking for interesting lighting situations which already had a lot of contrast.

HP5+ is, as someone pointed out above, a film that can be matched to just about any conditions. It's readily available, and by today's standards inexpensive. Along with Tri-X it is possibly the most versatile film on the market.