FP4 vs FP4+

P

papaki

Established
Local time
3:29 PM
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
95
After having used lots of the nice FP4+, I have acquired a large batch of FP4 (non plus) 135 rolls. Are there any differences between FP4 and FP4+? Is it the same emulsion? Are there things to consider when shooting and developing it other than FP4 being a 10+ years expired film?
 
+ version was said to have more "sparkle" per the Ilford rep. + did not last long and they reverted to original if memory serves correctly.

I hope ten year old film was free.
 
Ronald M said:
+ version was said to have more "sparkle" per the Ilford rep. + did not last long and they reverted to original if memory serves correctly.

I hope ten year old film was free.
Click to expand...


Absolutely untrue. FP4 Plus was introduced almost 25 years ago and is still being made today. I have a brick of it in front of me now, along with a brick of HP5 Plus and a couple rolls of Pan-F Plus. All purchased recently from B&H.
 
Are they the same thing? Should I use the times for FP4+ developing the FP4? In terms of resolution is there any difference? Are both of the same qualities?
 
Ilford FP4 (w/o Plus) was discontinued in 1990. Treat it like you would any very old and expired film. It'll have a lot of base fog and you'll want to over expose it probably a lot. I'd run a test roll with frames ranging from ISO 125-25. You can probably find development times in old manuals or on the inside of the boxes (if you have them). The times will not be accurate but they may be a starting off point. I might also try the Plus times to see what happens. Another thing you could try is a 1% benzotriazole solution to reduce the base fog that will surely have built up over time. There is no real way to say what the condition of the film is, considering we can't know how it was stored. Deep freezer? Use it as new. Under the bed? Uh, see what happens.

I'm not sure what Ilford said about the differences per se. I'm guessing at the time they considered the "Plus" to be "Better". I doubt they'll be drastically different.
 
I've shot a lot of Ilford surveillance film which was basically exactly like the one 72 shots roll of Ilford HP5 (w/o plus) I had (less fogged tho). I developed it like HP5+ and it came out fine. So I guess one could do this for FP4 too.
 
An old Agfa chart for Rodinal and Rodinal Special (nothing like Rodinal, it was a phenidone developer probably rather like DDX or Microphen) shows the same times for FP4 and FP4+ for Rodinal, but shorter times (and higher film speed) for FP4+. For what it's worth.
 
Done it! It looks like the development times of FP4+ work fine for FP4. It needs a bit of a tweak to get it closer to my taste, but it seems to be the case.
Surprisingly it has no fog at all (I have used XTOL 1+1). I have the feeling that it looks less sharp than the FP4+. It could be due to the age of the film. Also, there are a couple of points on the 36 frame strip that the emulsion came off from the base.
 
I got given a bulk loader that had about 20m of fp4 in it. I used the fp4+ times as a start, I think I ended up lengthening the development time by 10% or so?
 
It must be something like that. I have two 100ft rolls of it, plenty of margin for testing (a 36 frame roll will be enough to nail it).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom