Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> Reliable reciprocity data for Ilford FP4+ |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Reliable reciprocity data for Ilford FP4+
Having taken the plunge and acquired a suitably veteran 5x7 Sinar Norma, I now face the question of which film to use. At least I don't have to do too much research as the commonly available options are Ilford HP5+ or FP4+. I'm drawn to FP4+, simply because of the look of contact prints made from this film in this format. (I'll be contact printing, rather than enlarging.) Price is not a factor in the decision because both films cost pretty much the same. What might be a deciding factor is availability of reciprocity data for FP4+, since I'm likely to be facing relatively long exposure times.
I have used the data from the Howard Bond article (Photo Techniques, 2003) on reciprocity for Delta 100, TriX and HP5+ and found it to be quite reliable. Unfortunately Mr Bond didn't test FP4+ I'm not inclined to believe Ilford since all their reciprocity graphs look the same, irrespective of the film, so can anyone point me in the direction of data that is likely to be reliable for calculating compensation for reciprocity failure with this film? Yours hopefully...
__________________
************************************************** ************************* More photos live here http://www.flickr.com/photos/arm_a_dillo/ |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Paul
I've used this reciprosity chart for years and its never failed. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks Les. I shall have a play and see how I get on.
__________________
************************************************** ************************* More photos live here http://www.flickr.com/photos/arm_a_dillo/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I've not seen that table before, where did it come from? Tom |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Tom, I got it from a friend in America many years ago and have found it to be very accurate. I vaugely remember him saying that he had got it from John Sexton.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Les,
I know this isn't a table that originated with you, but do you have any take on the TMX and TMY times? Both films have the same corrected times for both 15 and 30 second metered times, just in different unit combinations, seconds only from 15 seconds and minutes + seconds from the 30 second metered exposure. Just curious about the apparent 'mistake'. Lee Edit: Just graphed the numbers and ran some regressions. It appears that the values are correct as adjustments from the 30 second metered exposure. They appear anomalous when taken as the adjusted exposures for a 15 second metered exposure. Last edited by lee l; 29th July 2010 at 02:11 AM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Reciprocity table’s comparison
Just for fun I’ve compared the table provided by Les McLean and the table included in the Book of Pyro from Gordon Hutchings. The numbers for FP4+ & PanF, HP5+ and Delta are exactly the same. According to Hutchings Ilford films do not gain contrast during long exposures so do not need adjusted development times. He does not provide a table for Kodak films. Then I’ve compared the tables from Hutchings with the table provided by Ralph Lambrecht on his web site http://www.darkroomagic.com/DarkroomMagic/Camera.html. According to Ralph the column conventional is for films like FP4+, HP5+ and Tri-X. Some of the numbers are the same but for example Hutchings gives 60s with a 15s meter reading for FP4+ and 45s for HP5+. Ralph gives 45s for both films and according to him the exposure of 45s raises the contrast N+1. When the meter reads 60s, Ralph gives 4m 50s for conventional films and Hutchings gives 10m for FP4+ and 8m for HP5+. Then I’ve compared the numbers from Hutchings with the table provided by Howard Bond in the article Black-and-White Reciprocity Departure Revisited (2003) http://www.willwilson.com/articles/0...ciprocity2.pdf. For HP5+ and a reading of 2s, Hutchings gives 3s, Bond gives 2s, with a reading of 4s, Hutchings gives 7s, Bond gives 5s, with a reading of 8s Hutchings gives 17s, Bond 10s. When we go to 1m, Hutchings gives 8m, Bond 2m 36s which is a big difference. According to the article, HP5+ does not need development time’s adjustment. Now if I compared Hutchings table for Tri-X with Bond’s table, the difference are immense. The same is true with Lambrecht table and Bond table. If I compared Hutching table with Bruce Barnbaum table for Tri-X, again the numbers are quite different. With a reading of 5s, Barnbaum gives 8s and he specifies a raise in contrast of N+1/2 compared to 20s for Hutchings table. For 1m, Barnbaum gives 3m with a raise in contrast of N+1 and Hutchings gives 9m a really big difference. Numbers for Tri-X from Barnbaum and Bond are almost identical but Barnbaum mentions the raise in contrast (N+1, N+2…) and Bond does not. I guess I could go on and on with other tables. Which one is the best I don’t know and I cannot judge because I don’t have my own table. For Tri-X I use both tables from Bond and Barnbaum with good results and for FP4+ and HP5+ I use the table from Hutchings which is the same as provided by Les McLean. Jacques |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I have spent the last few days using Les's chart for HP5 and the data it yeilds is good
Looking at the developed negatives the times it suggests are perhaps a touch generous - but better a little more than a little less. It was a new experience for me to break out the timer I normally use for toning prints, open the shutter, start the timer and then walk away for 12 minutes Martin |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I have tried Les's times around the 1 to 25secs and it it seems to work fine.
Tony |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I was about to suggest Fuji Acros 100 because of this film's excellent reciprocity departure characteristics. I've used it for long exposures in roll film formats and found that Fuji's own data for this film is an exceptionally good starting point. The vast majority of the long exposure shots I've made using these data have given me negatives of excellent quality. Sadly, at least here in the US, one cannot get this film in 5x7 sheet sizes. But if you ever find yourself in need of 4x5 film, you owe it to yourself to give this one a try.
|
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FP4+ and Ilfosol 3 | Alansworld | Monochrome Film | 11 | 22nd April 2010 05:24 PM |
Old HP4 and FP4 | StanW | Ask Les | 0 | 6th November 2009 08:38 PM |
HP5 Reciprocity Failure | Victor Krag | Photography in general | 0 | 15th February 2009 08:34 PM |
Reciprocity? | Mike Meal | Monochrome Film | 8 | 8th January 2009 05:30 PM |