Ilford HP5 Stand Development

[Faintandfuzzy]

For maximizing edge sharpness, I often used stand development with Ilford Delta 100. I’d like to try this with Ilford HP5….which is my primary 35mm B&W film. Has anyone used the film with different developers, dilutions, timings, etc, for stand processing?

 

[Chris101]

Pages here display with a white background for me, so I cannot see your post. I find in nearly all forum software, it's best not to specify a color, because, sure as shooting, the guy with the answer has his background set to the same color as was chosen for the font! 😱

That said, I have done stand development on trix, which is similar to HP5. As a starting point, try 3mL of HC110 syrup diluted to 500mL. Agitate for a minute, then let it stand for 29 more minutes.

 

[venchka]

HP5+, Rodinal 1:100, One Hour. Been there. Done that. Got the negatives. It works.

 

[Faintandfuzzy]

Sorry Chris. I did a cut and paste. But you helped me with my question so thanks! I give both the suggestions a try.

 

[venchka]

Search. Find the Rodinal 1:100 thread. That is pretty much the bible of semi-stand development around here.

 

[russianRF]

If you put "Rodinal 1:100" into the search box, it returns over twenty pages of results. 🙁

 

[ChrisN]

If you put "Rodinal 1:100" into the search box, it returns over twenty pages of results. 🙁

Here's the one Wayne meant: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61643&highlight=rodinal

 

[russianRF]

Thank you much. 🙂

 

[venchka]

Future search help: Add a user name to the search feature. I should have said to use my screen name in the search as I replied to it several times.

Thanks Chris!

 

[Ronald_H]

That said, I have done stand development on trix, which is similar to HP5. As a starting point, try 3mL of HC110 syrup diluted to 500mL. Agitate for a minute, then let it stand for 29 more minutes.

I have HC-110 and HP5+. But, the page I get all my HC-110 wisdom from (the Covington one) states that you need at least 6ml of concentrate for a whole 35mm film, otherwise there won't be enough developer to do the job.

HP5+ is a film that will tolerate almost anything, more so than any film I have used so far, although I like Tri-X more. Anyway, what can I expect from your method Chris? Do you have any sample pics? You really sure that 3ml will do the job? And what speed do you rate it at?

Cheers,

Ronald

p.s Rodinal is for another time...

 

[Faintandfuzzy]

Here's the one Wayne meant: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61643&highlight=rodinal

Thanks Chris. I'll give it a read!

 

[Trius]

1. Google is your friend, especially when you specify a site. E.g. "HP5 Rodinal site:rangefinderforum.com"
2. Nearly all films work in Rodinal 1:100 for 20min (mebbe a bit less) @ 20C with stand or semi-stand development. At this dilution, Rodinal develops to exhaustion, so longer time only means more wet time, aka worse grain because of grain clumping.
3. I have seen reports of Rodinal stand @ 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, etc., giving "great" results. Seems like voodoo to me, unless you are underexposing the film, i.e. "pushing".

 

[venchka]

I know one thing: I have abused HP5+. I have developed it in D-76 1:1, Xtol 1:3 and Rodinal 1:100. I have grossly underexposed and grossly overexposed the film. I have sloshed it continuously in Jobo tanks. I have kept it in the developer for a variety of times. I have thrown lenses and shutters in front of HP5+ without benefit of proper aperture scales or shutter speeds. I have yet to get an unacceptable or unprintable or unscanable negative.

In my book, HP5+ is Bulletproof!

 

[Ronald_H]

I know one thing: I have abused HP5+. I have developed it in D-76 1:1, Xtol 1:3 and Rodinal 1:100. I have grossly underexposed and grossly overexposed the film. I have sloshed it continuously in Jobo tanks. I have kept it in the developer for a variety of times. I have thrown lenses and shutters in front of HP5+ without benefit of proper aperture scales or shutter speeds. I have yet to get an unacceptable or unprintable or unscanable negative.

In my book, HP5+ is Bulletproof!

I have only fairly limited experience with home development, but I have to say this is completely true. But for some reason I don't like my results from it as much as Tri-X or Neopan. HP5+ often seems just a bit too grainy and flat (I only scan, no wet printing... yet). I only use Diafine and HC-110, played around a bit with ratings and development times, but I can't hit a sweet spot. That having said, some of my shots with contrasty lighting really look fine... but Tri-X looks and scans fine in almost any condition, and will tolerate abuse almost as well.

I still have a few rolls in the fridge, so the quest continues 🙄

 

[venchka]

So far, I have only used 120 and 4x5 HP5+. Grain? Fuhgettaboutit. My negatives don't have any grain. Which is a shame. I would like to see some grain sometimes. I need to find a developer for grain in big negatives.

 

[Ronald_H]

Ahhh, the lure of the big negative... I recently bought my first MF camera, a Yashica Mat 124.But the only 120 I have is Delta 100 and Tri-X...

 

[venchka]

It's all good in 120.

 

[Trius]

Well, I've managed to make some HP5+ exposures (35mm) that were completely beyond redemption. I'm not as good as Wayne. 😀

But I would agree that I like the look of 320/400 TX better ... I say would cuz I haven't shot HP5+ in a long, long time. It's funny how the eye changes with age, er experience.

 

[venchka]

I'm not good. Lucky, maybe. Besides, the HP5+ was A) Expired and B) Cheap! A perfect film in my book. Next up is 100 sheets of Arista.EDU.Ultra 200. My latest perfect film.