FP4 and FP4+

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by cliveh, Feb 19, 2013.

  1. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,709
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Was there a difference between FP4 and FP4+ and HP5 and HP5+? Or was this a marketing invention to try and convince people that they have produced something new and better?
     
  2. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The films were improved, the knock on effect of advances in the control of emulsion making, however the change wasn't as significant as say FP3 to FP4.

    Ian
     
  3. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,709
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Improved in what way for the photographer?
     
  4. Oren Grad

    Oren Grad Subscriber

    Messages:
    959
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
  5. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    llford reflect changes in the name something Kodak never did with Plus X, & Tri-X in 74/5 years.

    Films improve, it's what we want & need.

    Ian
     
  6. steven_e007

    steven_e007 Member

    Messages:
    829
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Shropshire,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I wonder if the marketing ploy was actually to under sell these a little? They maybe should have called them FP5 and HP6, but perhaps used the 'plus' as a way of suggesting an upgrade rather than a new emulsion, so as not to steal the thunder of the launch of the Delta series a short time afterwards? Just me speculatin' :wink:
     
  7. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,709
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
  8. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well if you never noticed a difference it's too late to ask over 20 years later :tongue:

    There's more important issues these days.

    Ian
     
  9. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,709
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Sorry I asked.
     
  10. grobbit

    grobbit Member

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    I am shooting both FP4 and FP4+ regularly and I can't tell the difference to be honest.
     
  11. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I hope they come out with PanF2 soon, that latent image failure issue bugs me, but PanF+ is my favorite film.


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  12. Keith Tapscott.

    Keith Tapscott. Member

    Messages:
    1,426
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Plymouth. UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I was told by an Ilford rep that the main difference between the Plus and pre-Plus films is greater latent image stability. I hope that helps Clive with his question.
     
  13. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I know that's true with PanF+ but not with the others. I'm not saying you're wrong at all, I just specifically remember the conversation about a guy with PanF+ that was left on his desk for a year before processing. Simon recommended not waiting longer than 3 months. Even with PanFPLUS


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well the PDF that's been linked to earlier in the thread has this comment about HP5+:

    The benefits of the new film, according to the maker, are a greater degree of compatibility with Ilfotec or HC-110, finer grain, higher sharpness and better tonal range.

    From what I remember it was much the same for FP4+.

    Ian
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2013
  16. Keith Tapscott.

    Keith Tapscott. Member

    Messages:
    1,426
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Plymouth. UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    HP5 Plus is my firm favourite B&W film in all formats. I sometimes use FP4 Plus in 35mm, but I only use HP5 Plus in 120 rolls.
     
  17. Simon R Galley

    Simon R Galley Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,052
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Location:
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Dear All,

    A bit late to this but anyway....

    The PLUS + emulsions were the vanguard of the new emulsions made in what was then the new fully automated emulsion making plant built here at Mobberley called EP2.

    Real benefits and improvements were made to the actual emulsions and their performance. In addition, and to this day, the quality of emulsion manufacture and batch to batch consistency remains industry leading.

    We don't 'DO' marketing 'TRICKS' our brand is trusted and respected for a reason, the addition of the PLUS was to designate improvements to the existing FP4 / HP5 and PAN F emulsions at the time, and to ensure our customers knew the films had changed, it was NOT a new 'design' emulsion therefore it could not be designated as FP5 or HP6.

    Regards

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
     
  18. Toffle

    Toffle Member

    Messages:
    1,848
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Point Pelee,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thank you, Simon. Very clear and concise.
     
  19. Dan Henderson

    Dan Henderson Member

    Messages:
    1,890
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Location:
    Blue Ridge,
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I suppose if those upgrades had been made in the last few years the would have been called FP4.1 and HP5.1.
     
  20. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,959
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have some HP3 from 1963. What's the difference from this to HP5+?

    (I'm kidding)
     
  21. Roger Thoms

    Roger Thoms Subscriber

    Messages:
    905
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    About 50 years. :D

    Roger
     
  22. Simon R Galley

    Simon R Galley Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,052
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Location:
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Re FP4.1 and HP5.1......very good

    and after all film is attractive to bugs......

    Simon : ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
     
  23. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Rather a lot, I cut my teeth on ex Government surplus bulk rolls of FP3 and HP3. These were quite soft emulsions very easy to get reticulation, but equivalent Kodak films of that era were no different in this respect.

    FP3 was OK, FP4 was much better, FP4+ is that slight step better.

    HP3 was a bit grainy, HP4 was slightly better, however HP5 was very much better in terms of grain and tonality many thought ahead of Tri-X at the time. Modern HP5+ is a superb film.

    Ian
     
  24. Toffle

    Toffle Member

    Messages:
    1,848
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Point Pelee,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    How about Ilfolith IH4? I've got almost a full box of 4x5. I recall getting something from this film a few years ago, but I've forgotten exposures and processing details. (Ya, I know it's not for grey scale...)

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  25. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,034
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ilfolith is very old, it'll be slow and was designed to be processed in a lith developer, for best sharpness but a high contrast developer can be used as well, someting like 5 EI. I did use some Ilfolith way back.

    Ilford sold their Graphic Arts and Medical side to Agfa from memory sometime in the 1970's.

    Ian
     
  26. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,762
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    They are definitely a little different. I still have some sheet of the original FP4 laying around. I liked the
    base a little better because it was not so slick, and less prone to Newton Rings, though the current version is not a serious offender in that respect. The changes to both FP4 and HP5 were subtle, but
    noticeable. Whether something is an impovement or not depends on what you are doing, what you are
    used to, etc. The change didn't personally cause me any problems, or really any fuss with procedure.