Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > Monochrome Work > Monochrome Film

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10th September 2018, 01:57 PM
GoodOldNorm's Avatar
GoodOldNorm GoodOldNorm is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lincolnshire UK
Posts: 1,227
Default Your preference, 100asa ei200 or 400asa ei200 ?

What is your preference in 35mm film, asa100 film @ EI200 or asa400 @ EI200 ? For example, can Ilford FP4+125 developed in a speed increasing developer look as good as say HP5+ 400 @ EI200. Has anyone tried this, what are your thoughts ? Thank you in advance, Norm.
__________________
"Tea is surely the king of all drinks. It helps against the cold, it helps against the heat,against discomfort and sickness, against weariness and weakness". Heinrich Harrer.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10th September 2018, 04:03 PM
fez parker fez parker is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: bath uk
Posts: 7
Default

Hi Norm
Im new here, so, hello. My 35 mm preference is FP4 rated 400 D76 dev 1-1, then Tmax 400 rated @ 1600 in Tmax dev, its absolutely superb. HP5 400 tmax is nice but in D76 is lovely rated at 800... Medium format ...120 TMY rated 800 dev'd in D76 1-1 FOR 19 MINS. its crunchy and gorgeous, hope that helps? Fez
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10th September 2018, 05:10 PM
Lostlabours Lostlabours is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Midlands/Aegean
Posts: 1,988
Default

Well I always used Tmax 400 at 200EI which is really its true speed.

A 100 ISO film at 200EI would be too contrasty for me.

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10th September 2018, 06:07 PM
alexmuir alexmuir is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Glasgow, Scotland.
Posts: 2,668
Default

I would tend to use 400 at 200. Increasing the EI could be seen to give less margin for error. I know that you should use careful metering technique, assessing contrast etc, to achieve the best exposure, but in reality with 35mm that tends to slow things down.
Alex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10th September 2018, 08:37 PM
skellum's Avatar
skellum skellum is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 1,330
Default

In 35mm I pretty much now only HP5, rated at 200. Good shadow detail and fast enough for me. In general I also tend to use prime lenses, which are usually faster and lighter than zooms, so easier to hand-hold. I don't really need anything faster.
I did try Delta 3200 a while back, but in 120. That was good! Tight grain, sharp, and a revelation for me at the time. I'd been shooting nothing but PanF at EI 25, and a film 7 stops faster was just hilarious to use. Street photography with a C330s hand held, in the evening? No problem. Never tried it in 35mm, but think the grain might become intrusive.
Speaking of PanF, try that in 35mm. With good technique you'll be amazed how fine a print you can pull out of it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10th September 2018, 09:13 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is online now
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

I think it was Roger Hicks who said that you'd get a better negative pushing a 125 such as FP4+ to 200 than using a higher speed film such as HP5+ and down rating it to 200. I don't think he was advocating either combo per se but was simply saying that a finer grained film pushed slightly would still produce a better negative than a coarser grained 400 at EI 200

The closest I have come to trying a 400 at 200 is HP5+ at 200 and this was simply because I used a bulk roll in a Mju II and only had a 200 C41 cassette to which to attach it. The MjuII has no means of setting film speed other than using the speed given it by the cassette.

Not sure there was a noticeable improvement in the prints from this compared to using it at box speed.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10th September 2018, 11:04 PM
GoodOldNorm's Avatar
GoodOldNorm GoodOldNorm is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lincolnshire UK
Posts: 1,227
Default

Would you notice a difference between 8x10 prints made on VC paper? Would the FP4+ EI200 have slightly blocked up shadow detail and the HP5+ have more shadow detail but show more grain? Which would be the easier task, burning in the shadow detail on the HP5+ print or dodging the slightly blocked shadows on the FP4+print. Is it a choice between FP4+ fine grain but less shadow detail or HP5+ more shadow detail but more visible grain? What would the effect be on the highlights, would exposing the HP5+@ EI200 make the whites (highlights) lose their sparkle?
__________________
"Tea is surely the king of all drinks. It helps against the cold, it helps against the heat,against discomfort and sickness, against weariness and weakness". Heinrich Harrer.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10th September 2018, 11:21 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is online now
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

I have no idea Norm about answers to your possible differences nor unfortunately do I recall whether Roger was speaking theoretically or had actually taken 2 negatives using HP5+ at 200 and then the same everything with FP4+ at 200. Nor do I recall if the developer was the same or if the size of the prints were mentioned.

As I cannot recall these details there may not have been any. In which case I think he was stipulating a theoretical situation and not an actual test he had carried out. He mentions this in one of his free articles on his site. You might want to take a look at the Roger and Francis Photography site to see if you can see it.

Mike

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11th September 2018, 06:59 AM
GoodOldNorm's Avatar
GoodOldNorm GoodOldNorm is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lincolnshire UK
Posts: 1,227
Default

Suffering with a back injury at the moment, not sure if I am over thinking with a brain fogged with Tramadol but; I find that it is easier to add contrast when making a print rather than trying to lower it. So I can see the appeal of exposing the film so that you have more shadow detail, and more latitude (if the film has a +2 stops over exposure -1 underexposure latitude you are exposing towards the safer over exposure end). Basically Steve Sherman's "Power of Process" I suppose I am mulling over the constraints of the 35mm film format. Back to the old adage "expose for the shadows develop for the highlights" I want a35mm 400 asa film that is fine grained that does not burn out the highlights or block up the shadows. Is there a film speed increasing developer that will give box speed or at least +1/3rd of a stop with a good tonal range and sparkling highlights, possibly Ilford ID68 or Microphen?
__________________
"Tea is surely the king of all drinks. It helps against the cold, it helps against the heat,against discomfort and sickness, against weariness and weakness". Heinrich Harrer.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11th September 2018, 05:46 PM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodOldNorm View Post
Would you notice a difference between 8x10 prints made on VC paper? Would the FP4+ EI200 have slightly blocked up shadow detail and the HP5+ have more shadow detail but show more grain? Which would be the easier task, burning in the shadow detail on the HP5+ print or dodging the slightly blocked shadows on the FP4+print. Is it a choice between FP4+ fine grain but less shadow detail or HP5+ more shadow detail but more visible grain? What would the effect be on the highlights, would exposing the HP5+@ EI200 make the whites (highlights) lose their sparkle?
Norm, if I could suggest trying HP5 in dilute Perceptol (@ 1+1 only!), I think this may tick all your boxes. I have used it a lot in 120, but there's no reason it shouldn't work well in 135. Good shadow detail, highlights very well-controlled and still bright (you can judge for yourself if they have "sparkle" ), good tonal depth to the mid- and lower-mid-tones (this is important to me), and very forgiving of over-/under-exposure errors. Grain is quite a lot finer than, say, HP5 in ID-11. Sharpness is outstanding.

It's a great combo! One of my favourites.

BTW, do use it at 1+1. I find Perceptol at 1+3 just seems to run out of gas and gets exhausted, leaving a neg that is all greys and poor tonal range. Bumping up the strength to 1+1 really lets it do it's thing. It's expensive, so I roll my own using Pentax Pete's formula (posted elsewhere here) converted to a teaspoon recipe. A total breeze to mix up a batch, as it has only three ingredients plus water.

Re. pushing FP4 to 200, I have only ever tried one roll in Microphen @ 1+1, and while good, it was nothing special. Technically it was fine, but tonally didn't thrill me. I would have to play with it to optimize to see if I can get better results (see the Microphen thread for comments on that).

Hope this helps.

Svend
Reply With Quote
Reply
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Viewfinder Preference cliveh Equipment miscellaneous 10 7th June 2011 12:00 PM
Rollei Retro 100asa-nee Agfa AXP100 kennethcooke Monochrome Film 4 13th July 2010 03:04 PM
Rollei Retro 100asa-nee Agfa AXP100 kennethcooke Monochrome Film 6 1st January 2010 11:42 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:07 PM.


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