hp5 to grainy in semi stand development in HC-110

[zabo69]

Hi,
i have tried developing an 2010 hp5 in 1:160 , 45min at 20º.
the filme came out with to much grain, specialy in daylight frames.
What could be the problem?
here some examples :
https://flic.kr/p/23NQL4b
https://flic.kr/p/EcwFFR
https://flic.kr/p/22LUNph

many thanks,
Avelino

 

[jamin-b]

I am far from an expert, but I have gotten better results with this combo when I rated the film at ISO 200 or 250. My semistand development technique is 1:100, 45 minutes, initial agitations for 15-30 seconds and then 4-5 light agitations every 15 minutes.
Samples: https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=96319283@N08&sort=date-taken-desc&text=hp5 250&view_all=1

 

[retinax]

I like to tonality you got on the beach and the indoor scene, but would also like to see less grain outdoors.
Are these negs rather flat and you/the scanner software had to boost contrast? Other than this, I can't offer advice, but I'll request what the experts here will need to give you concrete advice: Can you post photos of the negatives on a light table or against something bright, and how did you meter/expose?
It's possible that the heavy grain is due to grain aliasing of the scan. Do the negs look as grainy?

 

[Freakscene]

I like the tones too, and I don't mind grain, but much as the internet makes it sound like it fixes every problem there is in film development, stand development creates more problems than it fixes. Properly exposed HP5+ looks really good at EI400 in HC110 dilution H, developed with normal agitation. But it's also hard to know without any information to assess if you exposed appropriately.

Marty

 

[x-ray]

I agree with Marty. Honestly I don't think stand developing produces very good negs. They're flat and lifeless for the most part. The internet promotes a lot of really bad technique resulting in really bad results. Manufacturers give recommended practices for a reason, they produce the best results. Stand development to me is like the people going beyond capacity and life of their color developer. They get crappy looking images and can't seem to understand why.

Use standard procedures and become proficient before you start experimenting.

 

[zabo69]

i have seen very good results(web) with stand and semi/stand development. I think the exposure was bit overexposed in general, mainly in daylight photos.
Could it be the beacause the expiration date is from 2010?

 

[charjohncarter]

I agree with Marty. Honestly I don't think stand developing produces very good negs. They're flat and lifeless for the most part. The internet promotes a lot of really bad technique resulting in really bad results. Manufacturers give recommended practices for a reason, they produce the best results. Stand development to me is like the people going beyond capacity and life of their color developer. They get crappy looking images and can't seem to understand why.

Use standard procedures and become proficient before you start experimenting.

Correct, try a normal development recommendation. Also, scanning or improper scanning technique can accentuate gain on some films.

 

[zabo69]

i will try to post some images of the negative, i don't have a light table 🙂

 

[Ko.Fe.]

2010 isn't big deal. Expose as 200 and develop as it should be. HC-110 never meant to be stand developer. I think, this is the grain you'll get with it.

 

[zabo69]

Correct, try a normal development recommendation. Also, scanning or improper scanning technique can accentuate gain on some films.

I have done standard development with various film brands for quite some years. Now i am trying stand dev to see the results.
i tried hp5 with tmax dev, hc-100 (b) and rodinal( to much grain). before stand i used tri-x with rodinal( love ) and double-x@40o with hc-110.