Hp5+ @200

[Steve_Pfost]

Looking to try something new and seeking suggestions for developing times for HP5+ 1:1 in Xtol. The Massive Dev. chart has it at 10.25 but in the notes it says that "same time applies for iso range" and I see that the times for rating it at 100 iso also has the same time. So I was looking for feedback / suggestions on anyone who has maybe processed HP5 rated for 200.

 

[charjohncarter]

Steve, someone will jump in here. But that looks confusing on the massive chart. The note doesn't really make a lot sense. For what it is worth I develop Trix at almost the same time @200 as I do @400.

 

[rolfe]

Looking to try something new and seeking suggestions for developing times for HP5+ 1:1 in Xtol. The Massive Dev. chart has it at 10.25 but in the notes it says that "same time applies for iso range" and I see that the times for rating it at 100 iso also has the same time. So I was looking for feedback / suggestions on anyone who has maybe processed HP5 rated for 200.

I did a zone system densitometer test of 35mm HP5+ a few months ago. The test determines both the true film speed and optimum development time. I used Xtol 1:1 and came away with a true film speed of ISO 600 and a development time of 12 minutes at 68deg F.

By way of comparison, Tri-X tested at ISO 250, also with Xtol 1:1.

The results suggested to me that HP5+ is a little faster than box speed and Tri-X is a little slower.

Rolfe

 

[Highway 61]

By way of comparison, Tri-X tested at ISO 250, also with Xtol 1:1.

This confirms that the crappy stuff currently sold under the name Tri-X for $10 a 135-36 roll has nothing to do with what Tri-X used to be. I wouldn't call it slightly slower than box speed, but 50% slower.

HP5+ at box speed and developed in X-Tol 1:1 for 12 minutes at 20C will come out just fine, with plenty of detail in the shadows indeed.

 

[Ccoppola82]

I did a zone system densitometer test of 35mm HP5+ a few months ago. The test determines both the true film speed and optimum development time. I used Xtol 1:1 and came away with a true film speed of ISO 600 and a development time of 12 minutes at 68deg F.

By way of comparison, Tri-X tested at ISO 250, also with Xtol 1:1.

The results suggested to me that HP5+ is a little faster than box speed and Tri-X is a little slower.

Rolfe

This is interesting to me. I also did a densitometer test of hp5 in hc110 and found it to be 600 as well. I didn’t think this was possible. I thought I messed up my zone 1 setting by 1-stop by mistake and did the test again. I’ve not developed that roll yet, but will this week and double check my reading.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

The Massive Developing Chart is useless. Go to the people who know how HP5 works in Xtol. Ilford's data sheets give times for their films in Xtol. My experience has been that usually Ilford's times are good. Use them as your starting point.

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1903/product/695/

 

[xayraa33]

The general rule of thumb for pulling film one stop in D-76 1:1 was to lessen development time by 10% from regular developing time for film shot at standard box speed ISO .

This might be also true for Xtol

 

[ellisson]

The Massive Developing Chart is useless. Go to the people who know how HP5 works in Xtol. Ilford's data sheets give times for their films in Xtol. My experience has been that usually Ilford's times are good. Use them as your starting point.

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1903/product/695/

+1 for the Ilford times e.g., on the box. And HP5 is one of the more "forgiving" films if your times vary.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

I seem to be the only one here unhappy with HP5+ lack of contrast.
Overexposure and underdevelopment should only make it worse.

FWIW old HP5 (non +) was just dandy!

Chris

 

[Freakscene]

As Chris points out, the MDC is not quality checked and anyone can upload any times to it, useful and sensible or not.

HP5+ ei 200 Xtol 1+1 starting times from Kodak’s tech doc:
10.25 min 20C
9min 21C
6.5min 24C
5 min 27C

This produces a contrast index of about 0.52, very good shadow detail and very, very good shadow contrast.

I get about EI 500 as base speed for HP5+ in Xtol 1+1 so it is more than a 1 stop pull.

Marty

 

[John Bragg]

Hi Steve, I really like HP5+ at ei200. I have no data for Xtol but it works well in HC-110 (or Ilfotec HC) Dilution H. My time is 12 mins @ 20°c but I use much less than normal agitation. 10 mins should be close for regular processing.

 

[rolfe]

This confirms that the crappy stuff currently sold under the name Tri-X for $10 a 135-36 roll has nothing to do with what Tri-X used to be. I wouldn't call it slightly slower than box speed, but 50% slower.

HP5+ at box speed and developed in X-Tol 1:1 for 12 minutes at 20C will come out just fine, with plenty of detail in the shadows indeed.

Yes, actually my test showed Tri-X in HC-110 to be ISO 200. Xtol always wrings out a little more film speed.

Rolfe

 

[agentlossing]

I seem to be the only one here unhappy with HP5+ lack of contrast.
Overexposure and underdevelopment should only make it worse.

FWIW old HP5 (non +) was just dandy!

Chris

You can always add contrast later, HP5+ tends to capture it all and be very malleable, if not aesthetically attractive sometimes.

 

[Andy Kibber]

I seem to be the only one here unhappy with HP5+ lack of contrast.

I'm with you. I have difficulty getting something I like from HP5+ in the darkroom. Sometimes I can get there, but it's a struggle. My old Tri-X and Neopan 400 negatives are much, much easier for me to print from.

Andrew