Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,224   Posts: 1,532,537   Online: 1070
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    237
    Images
    4

    trying to get same results in hp5 or fp4 as I get out of tri-x in hc110??????

    Ok so I'd like to get similar results out of a ilford film that I get out of Tri-x in HC110. These results I speak of are the very smooth tonal seperation I get with tri-x sheet film and hc110. I have tried hp5 in hc110 and xtol and get a super flat negative. Any help with combinations is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,054
    Flat as in low contrast? If that is the case, increase your dev time, the number of times you agitate/minute or you dev temp. Development controls contrast.

  3. #3
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,981
    To my eye, FP4+ looks a lot like 320TXP...but better.

    In 4x5, with continuous rotational agitation (Jobo tank on motor base), I process both of these films in either D-76 (1+1) or D-23 straight.

    If I'm doing one sheet at a time in a smaller tank, I'll consider HC-110 (1+39) but, have found HC-110 too difficult to control in with continuous rotation.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    419
    Brad, I had a lot of trouble getting HC-110 to work in the Jobo. The solution is higher dilutions, but this limits the number of sheets you can put in the tank. The Kodak spec sheet says 1 litre of dilution F does 1 sheet of 8x10 which is 12.5 ml of concentrate per sheet. This means a little over 3 ml per sheet of 4x5. I use 4 ml per sheet just because I can't measure 3.125 ml but this means that dilution F requires 320ml of solution per sheet. I run out of room pretty quickly in the Jobo and larger volumes, in my opinion, really make that motor work too hard. I have read that I could get away with 2 ml per sheet, but I would have to experiment.
    "The beauty and profundity of God is more real than any mere calculation"

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    237
    Images
    4
    I do use a Jobo for both my 4x5 and my 8x10. I dilute my HC110 to 1:90 straight from the syrup. I then use 700-800ml in the Jobo at least with the 8x10 in the 3005 drum that is. As I said I really like the way these negatives print, however I would like to get better at least similar results from an Ilford film. I realize that longer processing will yield a more contrasty negative, but regardless of this as I have tried that, I can't make a negative that even comes close to how my tri-x and hc110 negs look. So one of you said fp4 in d76? Keep'em coming. Thanks.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    419
    Jordan, are you mixing from stock or concentrate? If you are mixing from concentrate, how much syrup do you use per sheet of 8x10?

    I am not happy with HP5 but I develop FP4 in my Jobo (CPE-2) all the time, and the negatives are very contrasty and punchy, in my opinion. Have you done any controlled testing? Perhaps the problem is in exposure and not development.
    "The beauty and profundity of God is more real than any mere calculation"

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    237
    Images
    4
    Don,
    I was just thinking the same thing while speaking with a coworker.... perhaps the real issue is more that I am treating HP5 like tri-x where I rated the HP5 at 125 the same way I rate the Tri-X. I do use my HC110 straight from the syrup. I only process 3 sheets at a time so whatever a 1/3 of an oz. is is what each sheet of film gets.

  8. #8
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Jordke View Post
    .... perhaps the real issue is more that I am treating HP5 like tri-x where I rated the HP5 at 125 the same way I rate the Tri-X.

    I'd say that you have found your problem. Try shooting HP5 a little closer to box speed. You've gone way off into the shoulder by rating it so slow.

  9. #9
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    The contrast variations with development time and/or concentration of HP5+ and TRI-X are very different. For example, AGFA claims it will not reach CI of .65 with Rodinal at 1+50. Phil Davis published a lot of such curves for a number of films some years ago in Darkroom and Creative Camera Techniques. The films may have changed, but the fact that you could expect no two films to have the same response to development time in the same developer is as true now as it was then.
    Gadget Gainer

  10. #10
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Incidentally, as Brad above stated, you only reduce contrast by decreasing HP5+ film speed by a factor of 3.2.
    Gadget Gainer

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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