XP2 SUPER developing

[bunktheory65]

I know on the ilfordphoto website it talks about using rodinal and POSSIBLY xtol for developing it at home.

What id like to know is, just what other chemicals were tested as far as developing it? Eco Pro is supposedly xtol redeveloped to get around kodak patents... by some of the guys who developed xtol.

 

[fs999]

Caffenol CH, CL and CLCS works well.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Actually, the linked article from the Ilford site started with HC-110 (for which I'm sure you could substitute Ilfotec HC) -- but at bottom, any B&W developer ought to work once you find the right development time.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

but at bottom, any B&W developer ought to work once you find the right development time.

This is true. Pick any non-quixotic developer you're comfortable with and use 75% of FP4+ time as the starting point at EI:125. Both XTol (replenished) and Pyrocat HD give very nice results for this film at EI:125.

 

[Auer]

I know on the ilfordphoto website it talks about using rodinal and POSSIBLY xtol for developing it at home.

What id like to know is, just what other chemicals were tested as far as developing it? Eco Pro is supposedly xtol redeveloped to get around kodak patents... by some of the guys who developed xtol.

I used Eco-Pro with XP2 shot at 200ISO and it seemed ok to me.

 

[Nitroplait]

Half a year ago I developed 2 rolls of XP2 in the same tank as 2 rolls of HP5+ w HC110 (all films shot at box speed). I followed the same procedure as I normally would develop HP5+ and all came out perfectly printable. However the XP2 came out slightly denser than I normally prefer and I would probably reduce the time around 20% if I develop XP2 separately in the future - or perhaps shoot XP2 at a slightly higher ISO.