Yes, they do, and quite well. PanF+ does very well with D-76 or ID-11 1+3. Delta 3200 seems to like more development than recommended for a given exposure index. I don't use much of the fast stuff, but it seems to me that I'm happier when I follow the recommendation for developing one stop underexposed that I've actually done. Expose at 3200 and develop for 6400, that sort of thing. Everything else works very well at the Ilford recommended times. Tweak it a bit from there if you think it's necessary. I doubt you will if your thermometer is close to spec and your agitation technique is close to the recommended norm.
Originally Posted by brofkand
Don't like Rodinal for general use with these or most other films.
I had been shooting Trix 8x10 when shooting my sex worker white background images, this recent trip I shot both HP5 and Trix. So far have not noticed much of a difference using these films under my lighting conditions and using the same development chemistry (D76)/times (same tank also). The Ilford neg looked a tad denser and a bit less contrasty than the Tri-x negative. When neg scanning I noticed no differences (have yet to print the negs). I think I am heading towards Ilford as you are, cheaper film, 25 sheets to a box not 10 and better customer support. Ilford seems to give a damn about their customers.
Originally Posted by brofkand
That is exactly why I am considering moving to Ilford. The film is a little cheaper (not much in 120 or 35mm, but every little bit counts), but the big thing to me is customer service.
Originally Posted by gerryyaum
It's the same reason I shop exclusively with Freestyle for film and supplies; even though it takes a week to get here in NC, I want to support manufacturers and resellers who support traditional photography.
They are both advertisers and have a presence on APUG as well, which means they are really committed to traditional photography, they just don't talk about it.
Originally Posted by brofkand
for the last 6 to 8 months, my film and developer of choice has been HP5+ and Rodinal 1:50 (printed on Slavic Unibrom Grade 2 paper). I have two scans of prints on my flicker if you want to see how it looks (I know, scans arent perfect, but it's the best I can do ). I'll be printing more in the darkroom at school tomorrow. Hopefully I'll get some more scans up in a few days.
Despite claims to the contrary, I dont find the grain to be overbearing, but it is there. If you're not opposed to a bit of grain, I think HP5+ and Rodinal 1:50 is a good combo, and it looks better in medium and large format (Yeah, I shoot 35mm )
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
You will like the Ilford films. They are different from their Kodak "equivalents". In some ways they're better, in some worse. I tend to prefer them to Kodak, although that may be in part because Ilford films were the first black-and-white films I tried. (The friend that got me interested in photography used FP4 and HP5, so they were a good place to start and the results were good enough that I didn't try any alternatives for a few years.)
Pan-F Plus has become a bit of a sleeper film for me. I would never have told you it was my favourite film (until recently) but I keep getting good results from it. I find now that I tend to prefer it when I can work with its slow speed, which is a good chunk of the time. FP4 Plus and HP5 Plus take up a good amount of the rest of the work I do.
The Delta films are also nice and I have had good luck with them but I have come to really like using PMK as my main developer and it works better with the non-T-grain Ilford films. I have a bunch of Delta 100 in the freezer and I am going to give it a good kick with PMK to see if I was, perhaps, clueless with it on the first go.
Delta 3200 is great although I usually shoot it at EI 800. Fresher is better. It builds base fog quickly, and it's noticeably foggier at expiry than it is when fresh. If you can get it fresh and use it quickly, it's at its peak and it is delicious.
Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.
Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?
In very general terms:
- I find conventional-grain Ilford films somewhat sharper than their Kodak counterparts
- I find coventional-grain Ilford films equivalent in grain or slightly grainier than their Kodak counterparts
- I find convenitional-grain Ilford films to have slightly lower overall contrast than their Kodak counterparts
Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..
FP4 is close enough to Plus-X that you can use either.
HP5 is close enough to Tri-X that you can use either.
Delta 3200 is lovely lovely film. The rest I never really investigated. That's all the advice I can offer, plus that you may not get to know the inns and outs of each film until you've used it exclusively for a good long time. It can be false impression to base what you like / dislike based on a 5-roll affair. Of course you'll get a first impression, but have you asked yourself why you're using all these different films? All it will do is make printing a lot harder for you.
"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
You can probably gauge a film with only a couple of rolls, if you like it, you like it, if you don't, you don't. So you pick a film you like, and then you copious amounts of it, and really learn it, and just when you think you really, really know it, the manufacturer will either:
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
a) discontinue it.
b) reformulate it, so you need to start all over.
c) change all the brand names so you don't know what is what.
See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com
The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....
I use HP5 in 4x5 because Kodak doesn't have Tri-x 400 in that niche market. With my cameras, shutters, developers, I can only get 200 out of HP5 in 4x5 or 120.
I know others shoot at 400, or faster, but it doesn't work with my stuff/habits. Nice film, but Tri-X 400 its not. (some will say that is a good thing)