XP2 exposure range

[philipb]

I recently felt the need to try B&W so I picked up a few Ilford samples: FP4+, HP5+ and XP2.

Reading the XP2 datasheet it would seem that it can be exposed between ISO 50 and 800 but always processed at 400. That suggests that, on the same roll, you can take a few shots at 50, then 200, 400, etc. depending on the required result.

Have I completely overlooked something or is that right?

As an aside I recently exposed half a roll of Reala 100 at 800 because I forgot to change the dial, then the rest at 100. The whole lot came out fine.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I would believe the data sheet on both counts.

Bob

 

[philipb]

I would believe the data sheet on both counts.

Bob

Well I've got the roll so I'd better give it a go and see what happens.

 

[kshapero]

XP2 - one of my favorite films.

 

[Film dino]

It's not "nrmal" to push/pull (increase/decrease) C-41 develping times, i.e. normal lab practice is to put all C-41 emulsions through a standard time/temp cycle, i.e. no compensation for under or over exposure at the film developing stage.

Also most C-41 films don't like underexposure; I would be hesitant to expose at ISO 800 unless that's the only way of "getting the shot"; my experience is that XP-2 is better at 200-250, though up to 400 is often OK.

David

 

[fixbones]

So if i were to expose my XP2 at say ISO 200, what do i then tell the developers?
Do i tell them to develop the roll as if it is an ISO 200 film? or just develop as ISO 400??

 

[gilpen123]

XP2 exposed at 320 normal development at 400 is the best result I get from this film.

 

[Burlap Jacket]

XP2 has amazing latitude. This shot was exposed at EI 25 and developed normally.

 

[Nikon Bob]

So if i were to expose my XP2 at say ISO 200, what do i then tell the developers?
Do i tell them to develop the roll as if it is an ISO 200 film? or just develop as ISO 400??

Don't tell them anything they will then develop it as normal at 400 which is what should happen.

Bob

 

[capitalK]

XP2 has amazing latitude. This shot was exposed at EI 25 and developed normally.

I'll have to try that. Looks great.

 

[mfogiel]

XP2 holds the highlights no matter what, but it does not hold the shadows... I have tested various exposures, and there are 2 things to remember:
- the grain is proportionally smaller with stronger exposure, so when you underexpose, you get big grain
- you can overexpose very heavily, but at EI 100 the sharpness starts taking a hit, so the sweet spot for outdoors is EI 200 in my experience

 

[rpj]

This question and its responses have addressed a question I have asked of several people . But now I have found it difficult to get XP2 easily and have started to use Kodak BW400CN instead. Do the XP2 comments also hold for this film?

Thanks for your help.

rpj

 

[Nikon Bob]

This question and its responses have addressed a question I have asked of several people . But now I have found it difficult to get XP2 easily and have started to use Kodak BW400CN instead. Do the XP2 comments also hold for this film?

Thanks for your help.

rpj

The answer is yes IMHO. I use Kodak mostly as you can't easily get Ilford films locally. Kodak had a data sheet on their film site years ago. I would agree that around 200 is a sweet spot for these films.

Bob

 

[philipb]

Thanks to all for the advice and observations. I've just scanned the FP4+ which I'm very please with. I'm working through the HP5+ in the OM-1 at the moment. The XP2 will be next. Then there's the Tri-X... I may be some time!