Dumb lad makes the easy mistake...

[rich815]

I managed to shoot a roll of HP5+ in 120 at iso50 the other week. I was juggling a Holga with the HP5+ and my Bronica with Velvia 50. I only have one light meter

I haven't been brave enough to try developing it yet. It seems there's not much info out there for pulling HP5+ to iso50!

The late, great Barry Thornton always felt the the "true" speed of HP5+ was more like EI160, and he was no slouch when it came to films, development and such. He reported and showed great success with HP5+ at EI160 in Perceptol 1:2 for 11 1/2 minutes at 24C. So, you may not be as far off as you fear. Perhaps that developer and time will give you a good idea where to start and adjust from there. I'd say maybe 8-9 minutes?

Perceptol is great stuff by the way.

 

[JeremyR]

I still have mine from about a year ago in milk jugs...I need to move it to more suitable plastic containers so that it doesn't eat through these.

It certainly won't last forever if that happens...

 

[sepiareverb]

My general rule of thumb is to add 50% to dev. time when pushing 1 stop.

HP5+ @iso50 isn't so bad- they'll be a little flatter, but try Microdol-X 1:1 for 8 1/2 minutes at 68° I had greart success with this combo shooting in a grain elevator lit only by bare lightbulbs which were in every shot- bulbs were not overly blasted out and I had good shadow detail (generally). These were the worst lighting conditions I've ever had to shoot in.

 

[Rhoyle]

Am I missing something here? There should be enough latitude to just develop it normally. Aren't we only talking about 1 stop? Most development charts say no adjustments for one stop.

Bob

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Depends on developer as well.

There was another person asking about Delta 400 pushed to 3200.

 

[sepiareverb]

Don't develop it normally- you've underexposed by 1 stop so you need to overdevelop it to compensate. Especially Delta 100- this has less latitude for underexposure in my experience- shadows will be weak.
Just add 50%, don't overdo the agitation and you'll be fine.

The slower films don't push as well as the faster I've found.

 

[rich815]

Am I missing something here? There should be enough latitude to just develop it normally. Aren't we only talking about 1 stop? Most development charts say no adjustments for one stop.

Bob

They'll be printable negs but quite underexposed and possible grainy. I'd compensate at least a little.

 

[rich815]

My general rule of thumb is to add 50% to dev. time when pushing 1 stop.

This is been conventional wisdom for years but there was a very articulate 3-part series in Photo Techniques magazine about a year ago claiming (and showing) that this over-cooks things a bit much and really has a bad effect on the contrast and tonal curve. You get negs that can print but they have awful tonality and way too much contrast. They recommended adding much less time for only a one- or two-stop push. If I remember it varied a bit based on film and developer but was about 10-15% for one-stop, maybe 20% for 2-stop. Yes, thinner negs results but better tones and contrast preserved overall.

I normally develop Delta 100 in D-76 1:1 for about 11 min at 20C. I cannot imagine the density I'd have to deal with if I developed at 16.5 minutes even if under-exposed for 1-stop! Especially for scanning.

 

[sepiareverb]

This is been conventional wisdom for years but there was a very articulate 3-part series in Photo Techniques magazine about a year ago claiming (and showing) that this over-cooks things a bit much and really has a bad effect on the contrast and tonal curve. You get negs that can print but they have awful tonality and way too much contrast. They recommended adding much less time for only a one- or two-stop push. If I remember it varied a bit based on film and developer but was about 10-15% for one-stop, maybe 20% for 2-stop. Yes, thinner negs results but better tones and contrast preserved overall.

I normally develop Delta 100 in D-76 1:1 for about 11 min at 20C. I cannot imagine the density I'd have to deal with if I developed at 16.5 minutes even if under-exposed for 1-stop! Especially for scanning.

Perhaps for scanning- I don't scan B&W so don't know how that would go. (I scan from 810 proof prints, not from B&W film, It is a lot faster for me, especially since I want the 810 proofs anyway) I find with my films the 50% works quite well- but I won't argue if you have an approach that works better for you. As I say in my classes- 'there is no right answer for everyone'

I usually only push to 800 on very grey, overcast, dim days- so perhaps that's why the bump in contrast is not too much for me- see attached- G2/90/HP5 at 800 in HC-110b. This was a rainy day in Montreal, February or March last year, early in the morning. I print this at 14x18 and while the grain is noticible it's not terribly distracting at all.

 

[sepiareverb]

As an aside- (sorry for the double post)
I had a student recently who somehow thought it was fine to shoot HP5 at 1600. Add to this that her aged meter is so far off that her normal setting for HP5 is 50!- (Pushed 5 stops!) We calculated a time of 24 minutes at 86° using the Sprint chart- last time/temp/letter combo on the chart. Her negs were contrasty, but not overly so, and printed pretty darn well. She had shot a basketball game, and the highlights were a bit blocked up, but the detail in the dark green uniforms was excellent. There was some fog on the film after that brutal development, I suspected the fog as the trouble with the highlights- perhaps not only the fog.