/ Register

Requesting your thoughts on Ilford FP4 developing in Rollo Pyro

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by jp80874, Jul 10, 2005.

Thread Tools

Thread Tools

  1. Jul 10, 2005 #1
    jp80874

    jp80874 Member

    Messages:
    3,494
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Location:
    Bath, OH 442
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    I am taking Bob Herbst’s platinum printing workshop in August. He suggests that the new (within two years) T Max 100 will not accept the Bostick & Sullivan’s Rollo Pyro stain that I normally get with T Max 400 in Jobo Expert drums. I want to shoot some ASA 100-125 speed film.

    Is Ilford FP4 a good slow speed film alternative to T Max 100? Will it stain well for platinum printing with Bostick & Sullivan’s Rollo Pyro in a Jobo Expert drum? If so what is a good starting point for developing time and temperature. Can you compare suggested time/temperature with your results for TMax 400? I can then make a relative adjustment.

    Further details: landscape work, Maine coast-Acadia Park, late July - morning and late afternoon light, 8x10 and 4x5 sheets.

    Thank you for your thoughts.

    John Powers
     
  2. Jul 10, 2005 #2
    lee

    lee Member

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Worth T
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    John,

    there has been some talk of Tmax 100 now having a barrier in it that prevents UV exposure and if that is true then it would be not to your advantage to use that film. I would use FP4 or even better yet Efke 100 in pyrocat. Certainly the Ilford films take the stain of Rollo Pyro pretty well.

    lee\c
     
  3. Jul 10, 2005 #3
    OP
    OP
    jp80874

    jp80874 Member

    Messages:
    3,494
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Location:
    Bath, OH 442
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    Thanks Lee,

    Can you offer a relative developing time/temperature to TMax so I have a place to start?

    John
     
  4. Jul 10, 2005 #4
    Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,517
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Yes, FP4 is a great alternative for tmx 100. Lee is correct, Kodak added UV blockers to tmx 100 and it has become essentially useless for pt/pd printing. Having said that, tmx 100 never stained as good as other films including tmx 400.

    If you are going to be using an 8x10 then I can recommend tmx 400, grain is not a concern (not that there is any, anyway) and if you like tmx films, 400 is the way to go for pt/pd printing. Developed in Pyrocat HD or Xtol you have a range from n-5 (SBR18) to N+2.5 (SBR4). Tmx 400 is an absolute pleasure to use for pt/pd printing.
     
  5. Jul 10, 2005 #5
    OP
    OP
    jp80874

    jp80874 Member

    Messages:
    3,494
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Location:
    Bath, OH 442
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    Thanks Jorge,

    I have been using TMax 400 for about a year and am very happy with it. However my instructor suggested that I use a slower film for my next workshop to obtain a look of motion in the seaside landscapes. That led me to TMax 100 which won't work here and then to FP4.

    I would like to find someone who has developed both TMax 400 and FP4 in Rollo Pyro in Jobo Expert drums. That experience could give me a starting point time/temperature comparison so I don't have to throw away several test shots. It may be years before I go back to Maine (1,000 miles from here) for a retake.

    Thanks,

    John
     
  6. Jul 10, 2005 #6
    Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,517
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Well, I certainly dont want to contradict your instructor but I find that the motion "sensation" can be better acheived by Les Maclean's multiple exposure trick better than the long exposure fluffy moving water. But to each his or her own.

    For pt/pd I would start with rollo pyro with 7 min at 70 ºF with a 2:2:100 concentration with a negative exposed at half the ISO speed. A word of caution, you might run out umph with the developer so run the jobo at the slowest setting.

    I really, really urge to test whatever film you choose before you go to Maine.....good luck.
     
  7. Jul 10, 2005 #7
    m_liddell

    m_liddell Member

    Messages:
    209
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Maybe have a look at using acros?
     
  8. Jul 10, 2005 #8
    Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,517
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I gotta tell you ACROS is awesome, but expensive.....too expensive IMO, and f****** hole they put in the corner is the stupidest thing I have ever seen.
     
  9. Jul 10, 2005 #9
    OP
    OP
    jp80874

    jp80874 Member

    Messages:
    3,494
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Location:
    Bath, OH 442
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    Thanks Jorge,

    Unfortunately the instructor made the suggestion yesterday and I leave in 10 days. I had planned to use TMax 400 in both 4x5 and 8x10. Of course you are right about testing, but there may not be time. I will order film today and possibly have it in time for some test shots.

    Thanks.

    John
     
  10. Jul 10, 2005 #10
    Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,517
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    As I said, far be it from me to contradict your instructor, but if Tmx 400 is what you are familiar with, it is what you have "dialed down" and you know how to control, why mess with something else? Specially in a workshop situation where you want the best negatives. As I understand it you are going to a pt/pd workshop, diffraction is not an issue with contact printing.

    If you want the fluffy looking moving water just close down more, or use a polarizer. I really think you should give Les's trick a try, I think you will be pleseantly rewarded.