Ilford HP5+ revisited.

John Bragg

John Bragg

Well-known
Local time
5:04 PM
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,813
Returning to HP5+ has been a blast. I am delighted with my first results from this film in a long long time. As others here have done, I developed it like Tri-X. I need a credible alternative if Kodak pulls the plug and this is it !
 
I have been shooting HP5 since 2007, and from time to time some Tri-X, and a smattering of Nepan 400 & 1600. I like B&W film and support Ilford as a company dedicated to this by using their films, developers, fixers, and papers in the darkroom, they all produce results I'm pleased with.
 
I've always liked hp5 ... I just find it easier to print, it makes nice flat'ish negs, the odd times I've used tri-x I seem to end up fighting with too much contrast
 
HP5 has been my most frequently used film. I had prejudice about TMY, but I tried some time ago and now is my preferred 400 Iso.
I used also TriX (the myth), but HP5 is better to me.
Also Ilfordlab is a good service that Ilford gives to us film lovers.
 
My all time Favorite Film was neopan 1600 ...sigh
Now its TMAX 100 & 400

As of late been Working with HP5.... Though I am having way too much Grain for my Taste
( i mean a little grain can be Fine but these are tres heavy grain )

Been dong very little agitation ,20C/ DDX developer / 1+4 / 10 mins
Shou,d i shoot it at 200 , different developer ???

Any tips/suggestions for less Grain will be Greatly appreciated :D
 
helenhill_HH said:
My all time Favorite Film was neopan 1600 ...sigh
Now its TMAX 100 & 400

As of late been Working with HP5.... Though I am having way too much Grain for my Taste
( i mean a little grain can be Fine but these are tres heavy grain )

Been dong very little agitation ,20C/ DDX developer / 1+4 / 10 mins
Shou,d i shoot it at 200 , different developer ???

Any tips/suggestions for less Grain will be Greatly appreciated :D
Click to expand...

Hi Helen. I had instant success with 12 mins in HC-110 dilution H at 20c for my personal Ei of 200. I give 15 seconds agitation to start, and then only 2 inversions at 4 mins and 2 more at 8 mins then empty tank at 12 mins. Thats it. My last 5 images on flickr were made like this. Grain is well controlled but sharp as a tack, just like I remember from Neopan. Hope this helps.
 
I always struggled to control grain with HP5 Helen, I found shooting at EI 320 and stand dev'ing to work best for me (using DDX too.) For some reason it and I never quite hit it off and Tri X worked more favourably for me.

Completely agree with Richard too regarding Ilford, a company well worth backing.
 
I guess I`m very much the odd man out in this in that I don`t enjoy trying different films and developers .

Maybe its because I shot K64 for thirty years .

If I am going to develop a film I want something which is straight forward with a reasonably predictable outcome.
 
Michael Markey said:
I guess I`m very much the odd man out in this in that I don`t enjoy trying different films and developers .

Maybe its because I shot K64 for thirty years .

If I am going to develop a film I want something which is straight forward with a reasonably predictable outcome.
Click to expand...
+1 with keeping it simple Michael. I only use HC110 these days. As for film, it has been Tri-X for years, but I also believe in having an ace up my sleeve just in case.
 
I've been jumping back and forth between HP5+ and Tri-X since prices of the latter have been rising steadily. I've been shooting HP5+ at 200 and developing in Caffenol-C-H (RS) 15min@20C, agitate first full minute then 10 seconds per minute thereafter (and using the exact same procedure for Tri-X, FWIW). Grain seems pretty well-controlled to my eye, but then I prefer traditional grain films. Slightly lower contrast than Tri-X, and flatter, making for easier scanning. Certainly a credible alternative IMO, but in spite of the price jumps, there's still something that keeps me going back to Tri-X when it counts.
 
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144278

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144278

I agree about supporting Ilford.
Ilford Fixer doesn't gas me out like Kodak.
I do use HC-110 as an alternative to Rodinal(Blazinol).
Love the clear negs, no base fog, fault i lived with for 40 yrs!
I prefer HP+5 for drying flat.
I use Kentmere 400 more than HP+5.
I am not into Shirley Temple curls..Tri-X make me crazy!
The Kentmere 400 is for economic reasons..
I rate for my exposure method about 250 ISO.
I like the gritty look.
When I don't, it's Ilford FP+4.
I shall soon try out Kentmere 100.
 
Last edited:
Helen, those are shockingly grainy but I still like the effect. I thought mine was grainy but tolerable. I think this one was shot around EI320 and I think I used Microphen:

U41733I1300668407.SEQ.0.jpg
 
dang Trooper that shot is DIVINE
Captures Innocence & Beauty
me jealous, jealous,jealous... :bang:
haha on Me and its True, shockingly grainy indeed

Alkis: yes, I much prefer workimg with liquid ...less toxic so to speak ;)

Thanks EVERYONE for your tips....will peek at your photo sites
 
... try ID11 at 1+1 at 20c anywhere from around 12min on a nice summer day to maybe 15min if you want a bit more umph when it's overcast ... I have pushed it to 25min which I fancy is maybe two stops more speed

Agitated (without inverting) first 30sec and then 5-10sec every minute

... here's one from the 70's

4756212680_3f1240f641_b.jpg


... and another more recent one

2995833341_98f909cb0f_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom