HP5+, what ISO should I set it at for this ?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by dreamingartemis, Oct 14, 2013.

  1. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi,
    Recently I shoot a roll of HP5+ at 320 but processed it at 400, I also shot bracketing with EV+1 and normal. I noticed I like the shots at EV+1. I'm not sure how to determine then what ISO too shoot it at to shoot it at EV+ when I've set the ISO to 320 and the processed it at 400. :blink::blink:
     
  2. wildbill

    wildbill Member

    Messages:
    2,848
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    160 on the dial
    Process for the same amount of time.
     
  3. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,713
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Like wildbill says. No need to adjust development.

    I do have question though. Are the prints really different/better or is it the look of the negative?

    The reason I ask is that I can typically get darn near exactly the same print from HP5, Delta 400, Tmax 400, or TriX 400 negs that were shot anywhere between 800 and 50.
     
  4. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks
     
  5. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm not sure yet, I haven't printed them. Right now I'm just scanning them as we speak, but I've noticed the shots at now 160 look much better than those at 320.
     
  6. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,713
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Whatever works, but that difference may simply be a scanner or scanning software thing, not an issue with the negative.
     
  7. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I thought the same thing, but I've scanned HP5+ shot at ISO 400 and the shots always seemed underexposed or were boring and didn't really work for me. For the actual first time, I actually like the shots I took. (I'm still learning).

    But then again, I could come up with a cop out excuse its because of the lenses I'm using for this shoot
     
  8. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,183
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It may be that your meter/metering technique/shutter/aperture/lens/thermometer/developer/developer dilution/agitation technique are cumulatively sufficiently different from the conditions used to determine the ISO speed of the film as to require you to meter at a different Exposure Index ("EI").

    If using your meter at an EI of 320 and increasing the exposure by one stop worked for you, it would be worthwhile just using an EI of 160 instead.

    WRT the shots you metered at EI 400 and were unhappy with, was they lacking in shadow detail, or were they low in contrast and highlight "sparkle"? If the former, your problem was with under-exposure. If the latter, your problem may be with under-development.
     
  9. Regular Rod

    Regular Rod Member

    Messages:
    671
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2012
    Location:
    Derbyshire
    Shooter:
    Medium Format

    How are you calculating exposure? Do you spot meter on the shadow textures you want to place on Zone III? If you do then the box speed of 400 ISO and development for the same 400 ISO can work quite well.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/regular_rod/8631193635/


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/regular_rod/8641972128/


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/regular_rod/8693464998/


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/regular_rod/8695307025/


    These might help you decide.

    RR
     
  10. dorff

    dorff Member

    Messages:
    458
    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Location:
    South Africa
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Out of curiosity, what developer and dilution did you use? Out of the mainstream developers, I can't think of one that would give particularly dull results with HP5+, unless you are using it in a way not intended. As Matt mentioned, there are plenty of other things apart from speed rating that could be wrong, and it is well worth the effort to figure out exactly what it is that is not working for you as it should.

    There is in principle nothing wrong with settling on an EI of 160 for your workflow, assuming that you scan only. I would rather understand how and why I deviate from the norm, though. That gives one far greater control and enables good decisions in difficult circumstances. While it may give the best results for your current scanning setup, there is something to be said for getting the best negative, and optimising your equipment and techniques around that. In future, that would enable a better scan from the same negative, or alternatively a better darkroom print. While Mark is correct in saying that keeping development constant, one may be able to get remarkably similar looking prints from EI 50 through 800, I must point out that you will definitely see deterioration in the shadows or highlights, depending on at which end you are. Whether that matters for a particular print is entirely dependent on how important those zones in the particular image are, and how well you can print a difficult negative. HP5+ captures easily more than 10 stops of dynamic range, but to get the extremes onto paper in a way that looks natural is not always that easy.
     
  11. Terry Christian

    Terry Christian Subscriber

    Messages:
    696
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2011
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What dorff said.
    The purpose of the negative is not to give you an exciting scan or print. Its purpose is to hold all the detail of the scene necessary to make your final scan (through Photoshop adjustments and curves) or your final print (through contrast filters, burning/dodging).
    Whatever EI and developing schemes get all the detail you need on the negative are the right ones.
     
  12. cjbecker

    cjbecker Member

    Messages:
    796
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Location:
    IN
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Let's get off the scanning talk. That's not for here.

    I shot hp5 from 160 to 800 and could never get it to do what I wanted. But I could always get it to look decent.
     
  13. momus

    momus Member

    Messages:
    2,706
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    Lower Earth
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm wondering about the developer as well. I use D76 for Tri-X, and I have used it for HP5 as well, but Acufine gave me a look w/ the HP5 that I preferred. One thing I would suggest (and I wish to goodness I would follow this myself) is to make only ONE change and see how things go. Usually, the differences in ISO that you're talking about are pretty small when shooting HP5. Developer choice, developer freshness, agitation procedures, the light that you took the photos in, your metering technique, etc can all influence what your neg looks like.

    I also concur that even though the negs may look different, you may not see much difference on the prints if you use your graded papers/filters to get a print that you like. Since the neg is the next to last stop in the process, I would make some prints and see what's up.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 15, 2013
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. J.Marks

    J.Marks Member

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Location:
    Holly Hill,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Ilford HP 5 @ 200, developed in Moersch Tanol 1+1+100 or PMK 1+2 +100 for time of ISO 400. Makes for excellent negatives
     
  16. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,261
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What film speed do you like your prints best at? That's the speed you should be shooting at.

    Making negatives that work well with the rest of your work flow will remove a ton of frustration in the darkroom come printing time. And to make such negatives, some testing is required.

    You are probably unique in what your situation is, and if you think about it, all of these factors play into what speed you should expose HP5 at to give YOU pleasing results:
    - Your lighting conditions / quality of light where you live and photograph
    - Your metering technique
    - Your meter accuracy
    - Your lens
    - Your shutter accuracy
    - Your water supply
    - Your film developer
    - Darkroom thermometer precision and accuracy
    - Your film developer dilution
    - Your agitation technique
    - Your printing paper
    - Your paper developer
    - How long you develop your paper for
    - Paper developer dilution
    - Darkroom 'safety level' (how dark is it really, and is your safelight safe?)
    - Are you going to tone your prints or not?

    There are a zillion factors that play into how you should expose your film!

    Now go shoot some film, have fun, and figure out what you must do to get the results you want.

    - Thomas
     
  17. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,809
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Why not shoot at box speed and develop to what you find best?
     
  18. Mark_S

    Mark_S Member

    Messages:
    543
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I shoot a lot of HP5+, mostly in 4x5, here is what I do:

    I set my meter to 400 (box speed).
    I place the darkest area where I want to retain detail in zone IV
    I expose two sheets identically (both sides of a film holder)
    I develop one sheet normally (I use Ilfotec HC at 1+31 for 6.5 mins)
    I inspect the developed sheet to make sure that I have detail in the shadows, and in the highlights, if not, I adjust development for the second sheet.

    For roll film, with normal contrast subjects, that would be similar to rating the film at 200.
     
  19. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,963
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    All depends on both your developer, the lighting ratios in your scene, and what kind of midtone expansion you want in the print. For ordinary
    use I generally just use box speed, i.e., 400. But there are times when I want better differentiation of the deeper shadows and will rate it
    lower. This film has a bit of toe to it, so for me sings best when the contrast range is not extreme. That way I can give it a bit extra dev for
    that wonderful midtone separation and edge effect this product is noted for. I use PMK pyro.
     
  20. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,963
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I just recognized that if some of you are on your toes, you'll see any apparent contradiction in what I just posted. More exposure for more
    development. Yup. Might go against Zone theory, but then I control the otherwise blown-out highlight with either an unsharp mask or, more
    often nowadays, by punching in highlight details by split printing some of these newer excellent VC papers. We do have some tricks that one
    won't read about in those old Ansel guides.
     
  21. dorff

    dorff Member

    Messages:
    458
    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Location:
    South Africa
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well, you have some advice to sieve through here! Technically, Thomas covers a great many things that you should consider, but if you are like me and have limited time juggling family life, a professional career and a few other interests, then you would want to take a few short cuts with the least risk of losing something important. So think about the following:

    Change one thing at a time, until you are sure you understand how that affects you. The most important things are (in my view): Choice of developer and dilution; agitation (do not underestimate this!); developing time; temperature; exposure (including any bias/fault on your camera or lightmeter). If you add filtration, that will change a few things, especially how skin and sky are rendered. If you do not have a densitometer, and cannot make darkroom prints, it will be quite difficult to benchmark. So if you could maybe borrow a densitometer, or mail your test negs to somebody who can print or measure them for you, that would help.

    The following is an easy (but tedious) way to get to more or less understand the materials you are working with. You want to know how to expose and develop while being able to maintain detail in both the shadows and highlights into the zones that are important to you. The technique I use comes from John Blakemore's Black and White Photography Workshop. You have to take something like a single-tone towel or coarse fabric - something that has texture. Flat and smooth objects like white walls and paper do not give you any means to gauge whether detail is visible or not. Colour patterns won't help either. So you take your towel, and using the zone system designation, photograph it at zones 0 through X. Develop and print (or scan) for zone V, then print all frames at the same exposure, and assess where you are in terms of visible detail. That will then give you an indication of how to expose. You could force the contrast up or down by changing the developing time, but only if you know what you are doing, and having exhausted your tests at the standard developing time. You will do this once for every film/developer combination, which is why almost all the experienced guys advocate sticking to as few as possible. Three films and three different developers already give you 9 tests to run. It grows exponentially if you have more. It might surprise you, but after having done this with FP4+, HP5+, Acros and TMax 400, I am back to exposing at box speed and developing at standard times with Rodinal 1:50, with agitation once a minute as two gentle inversions. This gives me more than enough in the negatives to work with in terms of dynamic range, and the negatives have punch and accutance when printed close to Grade 2, assuming average lighting and subject contrast. There is one important caveat: I expose for a zone, rather than averaging with the camera lightmeter. That is usually zone IV, the "high shadows", sometimes zone III. I almost never bother about the highlights, but if the contrast is high and the highlights are very important, I might meter them and reduce the developing time. Since I shoot roll film, that is the exception and not the rule. BTW, you are lost without a spot meter, either in camera or handheld.

    Since there is an aversion to zeroes and ones on this forum, I will not delve into your scanning methodology. Suffice it to say that some scanners (and/or software) fare less well with black and white negatives than others. You might want to solicit advice in the appropriate forum on that topic. It took me a while to figure it out, and I am still not nearly as happy with scans than with my darkroom prints from the same negative. The upshot of this is that it motivates me to make darkroom prints, since I absolutely want to see what the negatives are capable of.

    EDIT: Drew makes it sound as if it is easy to use printing techniques to salvage a negative. While experienced printers make it look easy, in reality it is not so simple. At the very least, it is time consuming. There are some scenes that are nigh impossible to expose optimally for the entire dynamic range, and then such techniques are very useful to get a quality print. But they are for most of us the exception and not the rule. You should not expose and develop your film in such a way that special techniques are required for every subject. Then you are definitely doing something wrong.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2013
  22. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That's why I asked what is the ISO when I shot at 320 but the EV is plus 1.

    As for why I was unhappy, well honestly, the contrast was low and lacked the sparkle I always want.
     
  23. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well, I usually metered on area just above the shadows so I guess Zone 2
     
  24. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I used Ilford LC29 at 30ml to 570ml of water.
     
  25. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks, I never though of it that way. I usually try to get the shots I want even if it means blowing out the details because that way I don't have to spend so much time dodging or burning. Though I don't mind playing with filters.
     
  26. dreamingartemis

    dreamingartemis Member

    Messages:
    286
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I agree with the scanning, I forget this is APUG.

    Meanwhile, I'm right now trying to find a good black and white film to stick with, so far HP5 is proving very fun to play with.