Ilford HP5 in Rodinal 1+50

[Shab]

I really lñike HP5 Plus with R09 when I rate it at 400 or less.

One example from December in Irun:

Bronica RF645 + 45mm + Red-Orange filter + Fomadon R09 [1+25].
​

 

[venchka]

More on point... Chris, Keith, Anybody...
For those of you with recent experience with HP5+ and Rodinal diluted 1:50, or 1:100 for that matter, how long do you develop and at what temperature?
I ask because on New Year's Day, 2014, I exposed several sheets of 4x5 HP5+ at my customary ASA 200. ISO 200 in NewSpeak. I have a bottle of Rodinal begging to used in my Jobo 3010 Expert tank. Tap water & ambient temperature in my apartment is hovering around 68° F. Continuous rotation on a Unicolor motor base.
I'm looking for a time to start with. I know that I may need to adjust my time according to my particular set of variables.
I also have an unopened bottle of HC110. I have no experience with HC110. Using it would be an entry into a Brave New World. I'll get to that someday with practice film. The sheets I want to develop now are not practice exposures.
I know. I'm supposed to figure these things out before venturing out to make real photographs. Sometimes Stuff happens and you need to rely on others for a Starting Point.
Cheers! Thanks for your help.

Wayne

ps: Chris, Keith, Everybody, your photos shoot a huge, gaping hole in another internet myth:
"Never, Never, Ever, Ever develop HP5+ in Rodinal." One reason why I am having trouble getting a handle on the time required for HP5+ and Rodinal diluted 1:50.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Flat as in no depth. Contrasty as in no middle tones. Too perfect as in digital! LOL. Seriously its pretty easy to identify.

Sorry can't understand at all. Flat as in no depth? To me light is flat as in low contrast or scene brightness ratio flat, dull lacking in contrast.
High contrast is high SBR etc.
That gets translated through the exposure and development to make a curve which is low contrast or high contrast.
Too perfect like a 8x10 sheet film contact printed? How is that digital like?
It might be easy to identify but flat vs contrast vs lack of noise/perection has little to do with it.

I develop my HP5 for 12mins at 20°c or slightly less 1:50 in Rodinal with agitation once per min and for the first min continuous.

Yes it is a myth that HP5/Rodinal gives Massive grain

 

[Ansel]

Sorry can't understand at all.

Film has a depth to it that digital does not. Film can have an almost 3D look to it, probably due to the depth of the emulsion of both the film and printing paper, also probably why scanned negs can look digital compared to final prints. Nothing to do with light... but we are drifting way off topic so will leave it there.

 

[venchka]

Sorry can't understand at all. Flat as in no depth? To me light is flat as in low contrast or scene brightness ratio flat, dull lacking in contrast.
High contrast is high SBR etc.
That gets translated through the exposure and development to make a curve which is low contrast or high contrast.
Too perfect like a 8x10 sheet film contact printed? How is that digital like?
It might be easy to identify but flat vs contrast vs lack of noise/perection has little to do with it.

I develop my HP5 for 12mins at 20°c or slightly less 1:50 in Rodinal with agitation once per min and for the first min continuous.

Yes it is a myth that HP5/Rodinal gives Massive grain

Thank you. Your time/temp. is close to what I had guesstimated. We shall see. Soon I hope.

Wayne

 

[Photo_Smith]

Film has a depth to it that digital does not. Film can have an almost 3D look to it, probably due to the depth of the emulsion of both the film and printing paper, also probably why scanned negs can look digital compared to final prints. Nothing to do with light... but we are drifting way off topic so will leave it there.

That makes no sense. The depth of the emulsion? Does that mean that a multi layer polydisperse film will give you a 3D 'depth' where monodisperse single layer ones wont?

I'm really struggling with the science here, note that I am a film user of 30+ years and have worked as a photographic Tech.

I don't doubt there are differences, none of which you have touched on in your posts. Film is a very wide church indeed and can encompass a fine grained film shot on a 20x24" sheet film right up to sub-miniature cameras loaded with grainy film. It is possible to get almost perfect prints or gritty flat or high contrast, 3D or 2D colour or B&W low and high saturation.
They all look different to each other, they all are film. Digital is the same, lots of different 'looks' so I really don't understand your 'depth' or 3D arguments as being 'filmlike' any more than I see grainy B&W as being 'filmlike'.

 

[Ansel]

Each to their own opinions Photo Smith. 🙂

The aesthetic side of photography is a subjective pursuit after all.

 

[Tom A]

I am not a heavy user of HP5, I mostly use TriX/Tmax 2-400 in 120. Rodinal gives a very "sharp" edged image though. This is old, outdated HP5, rated at 320 iso and developed in Rodinal 1:50 for 13 min. Bessa III. Remarkably "fog" free even 10 years out from expiry date.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Each to their own opinions Photo Smith. 🙂

The aesthetic side of photography is a subjective pursuit after all.

Absolutely I'm just playin' with you 🙂

end...

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

More on point... Chris, Keith, Anybody...
For those of you with recent experience with HP5+ and Rodinal diluted 1:50, or 1:100 for that matter, how long do you develop and at what temperature?
I ask because on New Year's Day, 2014, I exposed several sheets of 4x5 HP5+ at my customary ASA 200. ISO 200 in NewSpeak. I have a bottle of Rodinal begging to used in my Jobo 3010 Expert tank. Tap water & ambient temperature in my apartment is hovering around 68° F. Continuous rotation on a Unicolor motor base.
I'm looking for a time to start with. I know that I may need to adjust my time according to my particular set of variables.
I also have an unopened bottle of HC110. I have no experience with HC110. Using it would be an entry into a Brave New World. I'll get to that someday with practice film. The sheets I want to develop now are not practice exposures.
I know. I'm supposed to figure these things out before venturing out to make real photographs. Sometimes Stuff happens and you need to rely on others for a Starting Point.
Cheers! Thanks for your help.

Wayne

ps: Chris, Keith, Everybody, your photos shoot a huge, gaping hole in another internet myth:
"Never, Never, Ever, Ever develop HP5+ in Rodinal." One reason why I am having trouble getting a handle on the time required for HP5+ and Rodinal diluted 1:50.

I shoot at EI-320 and develop in Rodinal 1+50. Developing time is 11 minutes at 68 degrees (20C) or 7.5 minutes at 75 (24C). Contrary to internet myth, Rodinal does not produce more grain at higher temps.

Agitation is first 30 seconds then two inversions every 30 seconds.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

That makes no sense. The depth of the emulsion? Does that mean that a multi layer polydisperse film will give you a 3D 'depth' where monodisperse single layer ones wont?

I'm really struggling with the science here, note that I am a film user of 30+ years and have worked as a photographic Tech.

I don't doubt there are differences, none of which you have touched on in your posts. Film is a very wide church indeed and can encompass a fine grained film shot on a 20x24" sheet film right up to sub-miniature cameras loaded with grainy film. It is possible to get almost perfect prints or gritty flat or high contrast, 3D or 2D colour or B&W low and high saturation.
They all look different to each other, they all are film. Digital is the same, lots of different 'looks' so I really don't understand your 'depth' or 3D arguments as being 'filmlike' any more than I see grainy B&W as being 'filmlike'.

Ansels assertions are nothing more than mindless bigotry. They're common arguments used by people whose work is not able to stand on its own, so they prop it up with arguments that their work is somehow better based simply on the materials/equipment used. Its not something that is often heard from those with a record of exhibitions, publications, and sales.

 

[Ansel]

Absolutely I'm just playin' with you 🙂

end...

LOL. You naughty boy! 🙂

 

[Photo_Smith]

No one has said that to me in many years...
Boy 🙂 -in my dreams!

 

[Koolzakukumba]

I think your shots look great, Chris. Personally, I like white skies as they can simplify an image and can become a compositional element in themselves. It's difficult in my experience retaining highlight detail that would be present in a black and white print when making a scan from the negative. I'll bet there will be lots of snow detail in any prints you make.

I've always shied away from HP5 and Rodinal for fear of grain although I like the tonality. I don't think you can beat Perceptol 1+3 for HP5. The last time I used the film I developed it in Spur's HRX. That's a good combination but not quite as good as Perceptol.

Here's a shot from the HP5/HRX combo:

 

[Shab]

I develop with 1+25 dilution at 20ºC and 6 min of developing time. I agitate it constantly in the first 30 seconds (softly and slowly) and then another 30 seconds with soft rotations. After, every minute I rotate it during 7 seconds, softly.

Why do you use 1+50 dilution?

 

[venchka]

I develop with 1+25 dilution at 20ºC and 6 min of developing time. I agitate it constantly in the first 30 seconds (softly and slowly) and then another 30 seconds with soft rotations. After, every minute I rotate it during 7 seconds, softly.

Why do you use 1+50 dilution?

Why 1+50? That is the dilution under discussion. Or was. I have always used Rodinal at higher dilutions. 1:100 was my standard a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Here in Texas, tap water/ambient room temperatures run in the high 70's for 8-9 months a year. If I were to work out a winter time under 10 minutes, my summer time would be too short. That is also why I use Xtol at 1+3.
Right now, I don't feel like mixing up 5 liters of Xtol. It is a good time to revisit my old friend Rodinal. I have almost a liter of Rodinal on my shelf feeling neglected.

Wayne

 

[Austerby]

I've just developed a roll of 120 HP5+ at 800asa in Rodinal 1+50. 16mins at 20degC. Continious agitation for first minute then 10secs agitation every minute.

I'm very pleased with the result and would love to share it with you but I seem to have completely lost the ability to add any images to my posts: I used to be able to do so but it doesn't seem to work any more: I assume it's me rather than anything else.

Anyhow, here's a link in case you're interested:
http://www.ipernity.com/doc/austerby/29358969

 

[rolfe]

And to be frank, on my monitor, some of these look overblown too... Perhaps, I should buy a better laptop.

Actually, I don't think a laptop should ever be used for critical image editing or evaluation. They are too dependent on the angle of viewing to be reliable.

Rolfe

 

[Colin Corneau]

I've used 35mm HP5 in Rodinal and liked the results. Much like Tri-X developed in Rodinal, HP5 has a grittier look than it would have developed in D-76 or Tmax Developer. I like it for some subjects. I usually develop Tri-X in D-76 1+1, but have never liked HP5 in D-76. PMK is my normal go-to developer for HP5.

I found your images interesting, because my experience with HP5+ in general has been it lacks the 'snappiness' and contrast I like, particularly in the midtones.
A great film I have no qualms using, but the overall look I prefer isn't quite there -- you clearly got some different results which certainly caught my eye. Maybe I need to give that film another chance.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I found your images interesting, because my experience with HP5+ in general has been it lacks the 'snappiness' and contrast I like, particularly in the midtones.
A great film I have no qualms using, but the overall look I prefer isn't quite there -- you clearly got some different results which certainly caught my eye. Maybe I need to give that film another chance.

I never really liked HP5 in D-76 either, but I like it in Rodinal and LOVE it in PMK Pyro.