Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,928   Posts: 1,585,205   Online: 798
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: HP-5+ and grain

  1. #31
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300

    HP5+ / Print

    Here's an example of 35mm HP5+ in replenished Xtol.

    It's a print from a negative shot at EI 250 in moderate contrast, processed by agitating every minute.
    Print is on Ilford MGIV fiber matte, in Ethol LPD.

    The scan is not very large, obviously, but it shows a smooth tonal gradation, and when examining the 9x12" print itself, it's fairly typical for what I would expect from an ISO 400 film. Lovely texture, the grain isn't intrusive or distracting at all, but it's definitely there as an integral part of the image (which is why I shoot 400 film - I like it that way).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 111203_09.jpg  
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  2. #32
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    801
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by presspass View Post
    After using Tri-X and the Arista variant for some years, I decided to try HP-5+. Did my first roll yesterday, using D-76h 1:1 and Massive Development chart times. When I wet printed, I noticed two major changes - less contrast than Tri-X and more grain - a lot more grain. Agitation is the same - constant for the first minute (inversion) followed by four inversions every minute. Is this just the nature of the film, or is it developer-specific? Any help appreciated. Thanks.
    ime ~10 years ago, D-76h required longer times than D-76. MDC gives times for D-76 if I am not mistaken.
    The light source of Your enlarger and many other variables still exist, besides film and developer.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    659
    I think through the years Tri-X has always been just a bit finer grained than HP-5. The current Tri-X is remarkably fine grained, so I'm not surprised to hear the difference is greater now. Some people actually complain about the lack of graininess in the current TX.

    I'd be perfectly happy with either, but they have always been noticeably different emulsions with strong followings for each.

  4. #34
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,351
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    HP5 is certainly grainier than Tri-x, but it's also sharper, atleast in 120 anyway. Tonality is a separate discussion. I've standardized on HP5 and Tri-x both in ID-11 1:1. HP5 pushed slightly in flat light and Tri-x shot at 250 in contrasty light. This works well for me. I don't worry much about grain. I, like Thomas prefer grain in the image.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin