Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,549   Posts: 1,544,597   Online: 856
      
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 54

Thread: HP5 at ISO1600

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,951
    Images
    38

    HP5 at ISO1600

    I have often read that HP5 pushes nicely to ISO1600 so I thought that I'd give it a try. I bought a brick of HP5 and had a roll in my camera for experimenting. Last night while out walking, I shot about 6 shots or so in very low light. Sadly, I can't recall the shutter speeds needed but they were 1/30th at least if not a bit faster. My lens is f/3.5. Then today, I shot the last 4 images on that roll in much higher light, but still somewhat low as they were indoor shots.

    Then, I souped up the roll in HC-110 @ 20 C, dilution B, for 11 minutes.

    The film is hanging in my shower now and looking at the negatives I see many frames with virtually nothing in them. There is a bit of the subject, but huge swaths of empty negative, clear as day. It's too early to make any firm conclusion until I get the scans back but my initial impression is that this experiment did not work. If the scans look as bad as the negatives, then it would seem to me that I cannot use HP5 at ISO1600 in low light.

    Perhaps I was not paying attention. Would pushing HP5 to ISO1600 be for higher shutter speeds in moderate light? Is that what most people are doing when they push this film?

    Oh by the way, the last 4 shots on the roll came out excellent. These shots were the ones done today in-doors in much better light. So I am confident that my developing was fine.

    Thanks for any feedback!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,400
    It sounds like a case of gross underexposure.

    How did you meter ?

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,951
    Images
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by pdeeh View Post
    It sounds like a case of gross underexposure.

    How did you meter ?
    I metered in camera, with my Fujifilm GF670, a pretty reliable meter.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Ioannina, Greece
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    35
    I will also have to say that it is probably underexposure.

    I've pushed HP5 to 3200 and got some usable results ranging from a bit underexposed to some very satisfying negatives. I used a fast lenses 50-1.4 and 135-2.8 wide open. I could go handheld at about 1-15 for the 50mm and about 1/60 for the 135mm. I was photographing some street theater performers and some of the audience. In most cases the lighting was just the light from the street lights, those were a bit underexposed. But when there were some strong lights or for some indoors shots with average light, the negatives where magnificent.

    I low light I use the slowest shutter speed I can go handheld and my lens wide open. Then with a general metering rule (http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.ht...ensity%20Chart) I get the ISO I have to push.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,951
    Images
    38
    I guess I need to understand why my meter is failing me now.

    Thanks everyone.

  6. #6
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,532
    Images
    28
    Compare your Fuji meter in the same conditions to a digital camera, point it against a flat object, like a piece of paper.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,831
    You need to bracket...

    You need to understand how your meter averages a high contrast scean, if your night environment was high contrast.

    You may need a heavy tripod and long exposures.

    Uprating film only moves the toe a small amount it also makes a print more difficult unless the shadows can be dark...

    It is not like digital increasing ISO.

  8. #8
    ann
    ann is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,878
    Images
    26
    Another thought, rule of thumb 25% more development for each stop, 11 minutes wasn't long enough
    http://www.aclancyphotography.com

  9. #9
    Bundesphotograph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lower Saxony
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    87
    The Ilford HP5 data sheets says 14 min with Ilfotec HC (same as HC 110) dil.B at 1600 ASA.
    4 agitations per minute.

    Cheers
    Wolfgang

  10. #10
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,734
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    I guess I need to understand why my meter is failing me now.

    Thanks everyone.
    The meter is most likely not failing you. More likely this is just a learning opportunity.

    Is this the camera you just bought a few weeks ago?

    Look at each shot and think about exactly where in the scene you metered (how bright was that spot?) and how far you were from the scene (what were all the subjects that were in the angle of view that the meter saw?).

    It uses a center weighted meter and it may simply be that the meter saw fairly bright subjects where you pointed it.

    Back when I was using cameras with center weighted meters I had to learn what it saw by trial and error then remember to point it appropriately when metering. That's not as tough as it sounds.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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