Some B&W Photos with HP5 Film

[raid]

Here are a few B&W photos taken with HP5 film and developed commercially with TMAX developer, then scanned with Fuji Frontier machine. I am trying to figure out whether using TMAX was a matching developer for Ilford HP% film.

 

[jon_flanders]

I am about to try some HP5 in TMAX developer. How long did you go with the developer at what temperature?

 

[jon_flanders]

Sorry, I see that you had it done commercially. The first shot seems a bit grainy. I'll see how it goes after finishing shooting this roll.

 

[raid]

Here are four more from the same roll.

 

[raid]

Sorry, I see that you had it done commercially. The first shot seems a bit grainy. I'll see how it goes after finishing shooting this roll.

Jon,
I feel the same way about the accessive graininess of the film, when developed this way. How does the film look like when developed differently?

 

[Dracotype]

If you happen to like the graininess of TMAX and HP5, fine. But to me, HP5 was always kind of second choice when it comes to 400 film. I like Tri-X a little better, mostly because of the smooth tonal quality of the prints. I have never seen HP5 get the same creamy look as Tri-X. Maybe it was the developer combination. Just my opinion. I would say go for a developer that doesn't emphasize the grain so much. A nonaccutance type.

Drew

 

[raid]

Here are some photod taken with EFKE 25 and developed by same person with same developer as with HP5. I don't like the streaks in several photos (not shown here). For me, this is a test of the local lab. They only use TMAX developer.

 

[ray_g]

Raid, I like HP5 with HC110. I use Dilution H, with not too much agitation. Still some grain, which I like, but not as much as in your first photo. When I don't want grain, I use a chromogenic film.

I just got some Delta 100, and will try that soon.

 

[back alley]

i've never cared for t-max film or developers.

hp5 in ilfosol s or ddx is my preference.
joe

 

[peterc]

This shot is HP5+ developed in Ilfosol-S.

Peter

 

[raid]

Basically, I want to see whether I better relearn B&W developing and buy the needed equipment or whether I can live with commercial (local) B&W developing or not.

 

[raid]

I will tomorrow post from four more B&W rolls. It is getting late for me after a very long day. I have a meeting at 8:30am tomorrow. Have a good evening (if in USA) ... a good day.

 

[allthumbs]

The problem with the first batch looks more like digital noise and overzealous noise reduction than it does film grain. At least to my eye. For sure it does not look like any BW neg I've ever seen.

Raid, can you have your friend rescan with minimal processing? And in particular absolutely no sharpening or unsharp mask or noise reduction.

 

[raid]

The film was scanned by Sam'Club Fuji Frontier machine and no hands touched the film.

 

[kaiyen]

Well, the grain is really out of control on a number of those shots. I also would point towards scanner noise, stuff like that.

However, I have never been a big fan of TMAX developer. I find it gives more grain than it should without an accompanying dramatic increase in sharpness. It gives a bit more film speed as well but I think generally in the neighborhood of either box speed or maybe 1/3 of a stop. If you're okay with that much grain, you might as well go to FX-2, which has far more acutance and delivers a good 2/3 stop speed increase.

anyway. </rant>
allan

 

[billwheeler]

HP5 film developed in either D76 or HC110 shows less coarse grain than that in your scanned images. Have you tried Ilford XP2 color-process b&w film? It can be processed just about anywhere and produces beautiful negatives. Many labs will process the film only, without prints, for a reasonable price. In my experience lab prints from this film do not convey the information on the film itself. For better results you can print the negs yourself in a darkroom or scan them and process in photoshop. The picture below was taken with XP2 film.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I don't take HP5 to a commercial lab anymore...I develop it with Diafine now, though I *was* very impressed with the results from D76. I'm really curious as to how it does in Rodinal...I've been wanting to get some of that to soup my Pan-F in, but I'm always curious as to other films, too.

 

[peterc]

'm really curious as to how it does in Rodinal.

HP5+ is OK in Rodinal but I'd say it's much better in Ilfosol-S or Rodinal Special. Rated at 400 you can try 1+25 for 6 minutes or 1+50 for 11 minutes as a starting point.

Peter

 

[allthumbs]

The film was scanned by Sam'Club Fuji Frontier machine and no hands touched the film.

I was referring to minimizing the digital processing being done by the machine itself. The Frontiers have many adjustable settings.

 

[kaiyen]

I've actually heard that HP5 is _bad_ in Rodinal...

allan