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.
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.
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.
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.
wow, you worked with paul krot?!
that guy was one of the nicest people that walked
this planet !
nevermind
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.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 magicbecause 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!
>sigh< this thread makes me sad.
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 -I apologise if I've added to your sadness by sharing some pictures.
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.
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
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@3200How much is the development time expanded compared to box speed to get ISO 3200 out of HP5+?
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?