XP-2 Super

[Peter De Smidt]

I'd love to see XP-2 Super in sheet film sizes.

 

[Ian Grant]

That's not likely to happen as there would not be enough, if any, professional demand.

The pro-labs I use have switched 95% of their C41 work to minilab machines, max size is 120.

Ian

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'd love to see XP-2 Super in sheet film sizes.

It used to exist in 4x5. I still have 2 sheets in a box.

Not enough people bought it.

 

[Peter De Smidt]

Yeah, guys, I know.

 

[Snapshot]

This is a great film and it's too bad that it is only available in the smaller sizes.

 

[jd callow]

It used to exist in 4x5. I still have 2 sheets in a box.

Not enough people bought it.

I know the original xp came in 8x10 at one time. I sold a few boxes on ebay for a hungarian photographic pack rat.

 

[Ian Grant]

The major problem with XP1 then XP2 has always been the processing.

Over the years I used many hundreds of rolls because it is superb for push processing, and used it for rock concerts, I always processed my own. But none of my friends would use it as they didn't process any C41 materials themselves.

Most of the advantages are more suitable for smaller format 35mm & 120 where its flexibility with regards to effective ISO and different lighting conditions can make it an extremely useful film option.

However for large format the slower pace of working and often greater precision of exposure metering and processing make it a less attractive option. Most commercial photographers had their own B&W processing and in practice having 5x4 / 10x8 XP1 or 2 processed at a commercial C41 lab added extra costs and time

There was also the additional problem that XP1 needed slightly different processing times to conventional C41 film, something Ilford rectified later.

Ian

 

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Ian,

You make some good points, and I understand why it wasn't commercially viable. What I like is the combination of really good speed (better than I get with any conventional BW film) and fine grain. Plus, it...oops, better not talk about that. I'd develop it myself. I do prefer XP-2 Super to regular XP-2. I don't think XP-2 Super was ever available in sheets sizes, although XP-2 was. I'd like to be wrong...

 

[keithwms]

It's so smooth, what you can do is dupe it to larger sheet film. If you capture at say 6x7cm or so, then you can easily go to 5x7 or 8x10 and at that level of conservative enlargement, the grain of the duping neg will probably still control the overall grain, I guess. So then you can make lovely contact prints with roughly the tonality of the xp2 original.

But yeah I agree I'd like to see it larger

 

[Ian Grant]

Peter, yes I can see what your saying but actually as 99% of LF work is tripod based I prefer to actually go down the slowest film available route.

I say that but in reality I've also had to start using 5x4 hand-held, but where I live there's no LF C41 processing, the nearest lab's about 6 hrs drive so even if LF XP-2 was available it wouldn't be practical.

Modern conventional films like Tmax 100 & 400, Delta 100, APX100 are so good and in practice I prefer the tonality they give compared to XP1/2. I also use EFKE PL25, Forte 200 and Fomapan 200.

Unfortunately I have to provide both colour & B&W images when I'm commissioned to shoot concerts, and the high speed push process E-6 films are long gone, and unfortunately the client wants everything as a digital image anyway. At that I'd best stop as I'm still technical advisor to the company, and overea these areas.

But I'm actually saying I couldn't use LF XP2 Super even if it was available

Ian

 

[eddie gunks]

i have over 100 sheets of XP2 in 4x5. it is past date by about 10 years. if any one wants some to play with he mail me.

i plan to play with it when i get my DIY C41 up and running.

eddie

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear All,

As explained in the thread we used to make XP2 in sheet, it never reached viable volumes then and it certainly would'nt now so it will never be made.

Sorry

Simon : ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :