XP-2 and exposure

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by modafoto, Nov 2, 2004.

  1. modafoto

    modafoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,102
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Location:
    Århus, Denma
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hi

    I have seen that XP-2 can be exposed at rating from 50 to 1600 without change in dev time (C-41).
    Is that correct? And how should I expect an ISO 50 neg and an ISO 1600 neg to be?

    Morten
     
  2. psvensson

    psvensson Member

    Messages:
    625
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    You'll get some kind of image at 50 and 1600, but it won't be a good one. XP-2 looks like hell when exposed at anything higher than 320. Overexposure is not as bad, but you lose contrast, because the film has a long sloping shoulder. The most common advice is to expose it at 200-250, and I agree with that.
     
  3. Melisa Taylor

    Melisa Taylor Member

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Location:
    Tampa, Flori
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I know someone who swears by XP2 rated at 320.
     
  4. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,004
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have gotten excellent results from xp-2 super exposed from ISO100-800. I agree however that it seems to work best at e.i.200 or so.
    I guess you have to figure out what you want to do with either added or decreased depth of field, which I think is this film's largest advantage.

    If I had a way of processing c41 successfully at home, I'd use it all the time.
     
  5. TPPhotog

    TPPhotog Member

    Messages:
    3,042
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Morten I rate it at 250 or 320 depending on the lighting conditions. I've heard from people I trust that it's a film that doesn't like to be underexposed so the thought of pushing it sounds a little doubtful.
     
  6. Jim Moore

    Jim Moore Member

    Messages:
    957
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    Iowa
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    While I haven't used XP2-Super extensively when I do I rate it @ 320 with good results.

    The photos I have posted in the gallery shot with XP2-Super where rated @ 320

    Jim
     
  7. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,805
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well I used XP-1 then XP-2 for years uprating to 1600 & 3200 ISO but I did increase the developing times in Photocolor II C41 chemistry

    Here's a couple of images on this board :smile:
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=2465&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1
    &
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=2747&password=&sort=1&cat=500&page=1

    I do have the process data sheet near to hand if you need further details. Personally I now shoot work like this digitally as the quality is far higher IMO, and the clients!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2004
  8. Peter De Smidt

    Peter De Smidt Member

    Messages:
    1,064
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Fond du Lac,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    On a recent trip, I shot about 60 rolls of 120 XP-2 Super. I exposed generally at EI 200, but sometimes at EI100. So far the negatives look very good, and they've been printing on average at ISO grade 1.5. The negatives are contrastier than I expected, but that's not a bad thing.
     
  9. modafoto

    modafoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,102
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Location:
    Århus, Denma
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hmmm...I guess I will not use this film for pushing hard as I do not develop C41 at home (nor will I get into it...too much hassle)

    I try to shoot it from 100 to 800, have them developed at my local photo pusher and evaluate the negs.

    Morten
     
  10. Adrian Twiss

    Adrian Twiss Member

    Messages:
    623
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Location:
    Wigan (oop N
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Morten

    It may be worth your while processing at home. The results I have had with commercially processed XP2 were less than inspriing. I'm talking about the negatives rather than the prints.

    Adrian
     
  11. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,004
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The XP-2 Super I had processed was done in a professional lab, using a converted e6 dip and dunk machine with tightly controlled chemistry. Honestly, the XP2 is a very very good film. Like I said, if I could process c41 at home successfully, I'd use the stuff all the time. Latitude is enormous.

    Good luck. Please tell us what your findings are.
     
  12. Cheryl Jacobs

    Cheryl Jacobs Member

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, Colo
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    XP2 can handle a whopping seven stops of overexposure (not recommending that, though!) but is not at all good with underexposure. I've heard some say that they've pushed XP2 with good results, but personally, if I want to push film, I'll push Tri-X.

    Lots of people go for the high-contrast look of XP2 at 200 or 320. At 400 it tends to look kind of like Delta 400 without the grain. Portrait photographers tend to blast the hell out of this film to blow out unwanted skin texture and make eyes and eyelashes pop. I don't much care for that look most of the time, but it can be quite eye-catching.