Dif between delta 100 and FP4

[mark]

What is the difference between these two films. I have never used FP4 and with the crazy cost of delta in the 8x10 neg realm I was wondering. I know delta is a t grain film and FP is a more traditional film but that should not matter in a contact print. Or does it? What is the expandability of FP4?

[cliveh]

FP4 is a real film with real integrity. Delta is one where the manufacturer is trying to align the grains in the same direction and I don't believe they are always completely successful in doing this, thus destroying the natural integrity of the film. But that is just my opinion.

[mark]

What do you mean by natural integrity of the film? I've shot delta for years.

[cliveh]

What do you mean by natural integrity of the film? I've shot delta for years.

Where the manufacturer is not trying to orientate the grains in on e direction.

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Where the manufacturer is not trying to orientate the grains in on e direction.

I have to say, Clive, that you operate in strange ways sometimes. Not necessarily a bad thing (I like those that think differently), but this one I'm confused by.

Delta 100 and FP4+ look pretty similar in a print, actually, and at 8x10 size I don't think most people could tell a difference. When you print large, Delta 100 is sharper and finer grained, and when you expose film at night, Delta 100 has less reciprocity failure. The two films are a lot more similar than they are different.

[cliveh]

I have to say, Clive, that you operate in strange ways sometimes. Not necessarily a bad thing (I like those that think differently), but this one I'm confused by.

Delta 100 and FP4+ look pretty similar in a print, actually, and at 8x10 size I don't think most people could tell a difference. When you print large, Delta 100 is sharper and finer grained, and when you expose film at night, Delta 100 has less reciprocity failure. The two films are a lot more similar than they are different.

Thomas, you must remember that I am a purist who likes grains to be in the emulsion at whatever orientation they are laid down. The concept of tabular grain technology is fine, but I don't believe that all grains can be orientated in the same direction, thus destroying the integrity of the concept. But then I am probably slightly mad.

[Thomas Bertilsson]

But then I am probably slightly mad.

So much better than 'normal' or 'bland'. And I'm like you about the grain. Tri-X is my favorite flavor.

[mark]

Good god I HATE grain. I refuse to shoot Kodak for anything to be enlarged because of it, but with an 8x10 neg contact printing I should not see the grain, or does FP4 have boulder sized grain like Tri-x?.

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Good god I HATE grain. I refuse to shoot Kodak for anything to be enlarged because of it, but with an 8x10 neg contact printing I should not see the grain, or does FP4 have boulder sized grain like Tri-x?.

Tri-X does not have boulder sized grain. What are you talking about? Kodak also happen to make some of the most grain free emulsions out there. Compare Tri-X to HP5+ or Delta 400, or Foma 400 for that matter and compare. Or better yet TMax 400, which has finer grain than FP4.
Then take TMax 100 and compare to any Ilford film and you'll see that your analysis is right out the window.

If you contact print 8x10 film, then grain should not be a concern no matter what film you use that's available in that format. You will NOT see grain. If you enlarge 4x5 film, Delta 100 is finer grained than FP4+. But not as fine grained as Fuji Acros or TMax 100.

[cliveh]

The manufacturer has nothing to do with a specific grain size, as all manufactures produce films at different speeds. FP4+ has a box speed of 125 ISO and TRI-X is 400. So FP4+ should have finer grain.