Film and Darkroom User

Film and Darkroom User (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/index.php)
-   Monochrome Film (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=35)
-   -   Film XP2 (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=11978)

photomi7ch 31st March 2018 01:09 PM

Film XP2
 
Something for the weekend as my barber used to say :)

I have used this film once before and thought it was a flat (lacking in contrast) but it was a dull day.

I have a number of rolls to expose and thought It would be a good idea to find out what others think. I have looked to see what has been written on blogs like the online photographer etc and in so doing have a couple of questions.

1. do you alter the ISO depending on what the weather is doing? E.G the online photography suggests iso 200 for normal light, 100 iso for bright days and 400 iso for dull days.

2. Is it possible to develop the film using black and white chemicals if so have any of you tried it. I read it is possible but cannot remember where I read it or for that matter did I dream it :o:)

MartyNL 31st March 2018 02:04 PM

When I used XP2 the processing and more importantly the printing was done in a commercial lab, I was very pleased with the results although they were more sepia than b&w. I certainly didn't alter the iso.
However I've never been satisfied with the prints from XP2 from my own b&w darkroom. And the same has to be said of the Kodak variety BW 400CN.
Sorry I've never tried processing them myself.

Mike O'Pray 31st March 2018 04:49 PM

Mitch, I have used only one roll of XP2+ in 120 and only at a time when I needed Jessops to develop it for me. I am not convinced Jessops did as good a job in processing as could have been done but I was using an Agfa Isolette that I had very little experience of. I must have had prints done but can't now recall what they were like so I suspect they were nothing special. Somewhere the negs still exist but I never got round to printing them again now I have a fully equipped darkroom.

Since then I have used one roll of XP2+ in 135, developed the negs myself in C41 and the negs were OK but again I have never gotten round to printing. I must look them out and do some prints

You can develop in B&W developer at B&W temperature and from the evidence of the OP's I saw on Photrio, the negs were OK and the prints or scans of prints that he produced looked quite good but compared to trad B&W film they were certainly not "one level up" so to speak.

My other concern and it is one that may not affect you is what if any difficulties XP2+ negs give when using an analyser such as a Philips or RH Designs Analyser Pro for measurement. That concern is for another thread however

Mike

Mike

alexmuir 31st March 2018 05:58 PM

I have used some XP2, and quite like it. I found that, despite claims of great latitude, it didn’t like underexposure. That was with normal C41 lab processing. I would suggest using it either at its nominal speed of 400, or 200. It can be processed successfully in B&W chemistry. There was a thread on the US based Large Format Photography Forum about processing it in HC110, with times, speeds and examples. I have printed from XP2 negatives on B&W paper, and it worked well. I have also used the Kodak equivalent which was less successful in printing.
The other thing I found with this film was that the effect of coloured filters was more dramatic than with standard B&W film.
I hope you get some decent results.
Alex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

John King 31st March 2018 07:31 PM

Xp2
 
Not a great film for printing B&W in the darkroom. (my opinion) The heavy base colour affects the contrast and add to the exposure time under the enlarger. Agfa made a similar film but wasn't on the market very long and the base colour was green - not just greenish - but green. I never used that one again either. The affect on contrast grades was possibly worse than XP.

Of the main manufacturers, the best by far was the Kodak CN400. That I have printed in the darkroom, but even then it wasn't easy. Now, scanned and printing on the computer/printer it was very good.

XP2's predecessor which was called simply, XP. When this came on the market, Ilford made their own C41 type developer, which was reputed to maintain almost equal density from 800 right down to 50 ISO. Then as a bonus it was also supposed to be a mild accutance developer as well. It never sold as well (too expensive) and was discontinued before XP2 came along.

Some press boys used it and developed it in ordinary developer with mixed results but, shortly after this time colour was being used in newspapers so C41 negative partly took over.

Mike O'Pray 31st March 2018 07:43 PM

Lostlabours( Ian Grant) has certainly spoken of some success with it at 1600 but that was C41 development and involved if my memory serves me correctly with a form of push processing i.e. extending the standard C41 time of 3 mins 15 secs. These were night shots of music artists and bands in concert/ theatre lights.

Maybe he will pitch in on this one.

Mike

Mike

photomi7ch 1st April 2018 10:18 AM

Thank you gents for your experiences.
I note the disappointment in not being able to get good results in comparison to what we are used to.

It may need a different sort of expectation of this film from the norm. When I have the time I will expose it at 200 and 400 and see which is preferred. I suppose if I start from a low expectation the results will not be a big disappointment:)

Lostlabours 1st April 2018 10:47 AM

Yes Mike's right, I've used XP2 at 1600 and 3200 EI however that's with push processing in C41 chemistry.

When Ilford released XP1 (there was no XP John) it had a non standard C41 process time which labs didn't like, there were also push process recommendations in the Ilford data-sheet.

XP2 was an improved emulsion using the standard C41 development time to make it easier for consumer C41 labs. Ilford dropped the push processing times because labs didn't want to do this.

I adjusted my push process times to suit XP2. Around that time I was having business meetings with Ilford at Mobberley and remember talking to two of their directors and a research chemist about push processing XP2 over lunch. They told me the only reason they'd dropped any mention of push processing was because the labs didn't want to do it.

XP2 always gave me far better results push process than HP5 or even Delta 3200 when it was released.

This shot of Vana was XP2 push processed, (hand coloured).

http://lostlabours.co.uk/photography...mages/vana.jpg

Ian

JulioF 1st April 2018 03:41 PM

It gives more than enough contrast if the light is right. It is C-41 so it is a bit complicated to process at home but it should be possible with current color kits.

An example from about 10 years ago, Valley of the Fallen Ones in Spain.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a11...s/monument.jpg

alexmuir 1st April 2018 05:12 PM

I have to say that I recently printed from lab processed C41 negatives without a problem, and with good results. I will try to print and scan to demonstrate.
Alex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.