grain with HP5+ & Rodinal is this normal

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by demetris_ioannou, Dec 31, 2003.

  1. i just developed a HP5+ with rodinal and there is too mush grain is
    this normal. i'm ready to through away this film
     
  2. Rodinal is really bad for HP5+. I hear about this combination being a real mess all the time. I was disappointed with my lab-processed HP5+ and tried it at home in Kodak Xtol. The results were better than the lab I had been taking it to but not by much. I then tried a bit of Kodak HC110 on a roll of HP5+ and was BLOWN AWAY. It was one of the most incredible-looking rolls of film I've ever developed. I highly recommend HC110 for HP5+, even if you're shooting over EI 400. I haven't shot much HP5+ lately, though. No matter what I did, I still preferred the look of Kodak Tri-X over HP5+ and my current standard combination is Tri-X developed in Kodak Xtol at a 1:1 dilution. It's just something about the tone and contrast that I can't put my finger on.. I'm no expert at this. I do know that Rodinal is not good at all for HP5+, though. I suggest you load up bhphotovideo.com right now and order a cheap bottle of HC110. Here is the only frame I have scanned in from HP5+ I developed in HC110. It was just a test shot since I didn't want to "waste" any important shots on HP5+ at the time because I had been disappointed by it in the past. What it does show is more detail and less grain than I've ever seen in a relatively high speed B&W film before.. you'd have to see the full scan to see what I mean.
    006vxo-15932784.jpg
     
  3. Rodinal 1+25 makes HP5+ very grainy, pulled HP5+ with Rodinal 1+50 is reasonably grainy (and, IMO, much better.) However, this is definitely not a fine grain combination, although it's hard for me to say right now whether your sample image is too grainy (can't remember where I have prints from HP5+ done in Rodinal 1+25...)

    Generally, if you're looking for a fine-grain, full 400-speed or faster combination, you could try HP5+ in HC-110 as one poster mentioned, or Delta 400 in DD-X, which I quite like for its pushability.
     
  4. That does tend to be a fairly grainy combination of film and developer, tho' my results are generally less grainy than the example you've shown. You might try developing for less time as extended development with Rodinal definitely can cause increased grain and blocked up highlights.

    HP5+ at EI 200 in D-76/ID-11 at 1:1 will produce excellent results - beautifully smooth tonality and fine grain with very good apparent sharpness.
     
  5. Demetris-

    Yiasou!

    Yes, that sort of grain is normal with HP5+ in Rodinal. HP5+ is a great film and Rodinal is a great developer, but for some reason when you put them together the result is super-subtractive. i.e. AWFUL.

    I tried almost every day for well over 3 months in all formats, trying to find an HP5+/Rodinal combo that worked and then I finally had to accept that some things just aren't meant to be.

    But don't throw anything away! Rodinal (esp. around 1+100 dilution) is great with films like PanF+ that have finer grain -- just be sure not to overdevelop or the highlights will block. I've also had good success shooting landscapes on Maco ORT25c and dev'ing in dilute (1+100) Rodinal for around 8 minutes.

    HP5+ has really good performance in PQ (phenidone-hydroquinone) developers such as Kodak XTOL or Ilford Microphen. There is substantial grain (a little less with XTOL than with M-phen) but the tonality is beautiful and, IMHO, more than compensates for any graininess. If you want to use a liquid concentrate developer, try Ilfotec DD-X.

    Hope this helps!

    Happy new year :)
     
  6. Ok, I found a print made from HP5+ developed in Rodinal 1+25. It looks much better than your sample, are you sure you haven't overdeveloped or are getting reticulation effects?

    Generally I like Rodinal best with 100 speed films and slower, eg. FP4+ and APX100 both look very good in Rodinal.
     
  7. HP5+ is really good film, but it does not do well in Rodinal. Instead of throwing the film away, just try another developer. HP5+ does really well in D-76 (ID-11 for you Ilford fans) or XTOL diluted 1+1. Though I don't like Rodinal for high speed small format films in general, it does work a little bit better for Tri-X than for HP5+. Reserve the Rodinal for slow 35mm and larger format films.
     
  8. HP5+ in Acutol 1+14 for 7.5 minutes should delight you.
     
  9. I think we finally have our pictorial example of why Rodinal combined with HP5 or Delta 400 *does not work*. Grain is mushy, tonal transitions are harsh, and film speed is mediocre.
    HP5 in HC110 is *amazing*.
    If you really want to show off what Rodinal can do, try it with Tri-X, or especially Tri-X pro. You'll get Rodinal's outstanding sharpness while keeping exellent tonality and grain structure. Tri-X likes Rodinal - HP5 doesn't.
     
  10. thank you everybody for your help. i ordered HC-110 and i will post the results.
     
  11. The image you showed is cleary very much overdeveloped. The mushy grain is a result of that, not of the Rodinal. Rodinal in fact gives very sharp, distinct grain.
     
  12. I'm assuming that you rated HP5 at 400 ASA. What dilution did you use with Rodinal? I use Rodinal at 1:50 with HP5 but rate it at 160 ASA. Rodinal is at its best with films of 200 ASA or lower, but having said that, there are some faster films (Tri-X, Neopan et al.) with which it works very well. I'd be interested to see a scan of the negative.
     
  13. Rodinal in fact gives very sharp, distinct grain
    Not with HP5 and Delta 400. Even with my 6x7 format Rodinal yields nasty grain from either of these films because the core grain structure of the Ilford films is not a thing like Tri-X, Plus-X, or the Tmax films which respond favorably to accutance developers.
    Another pet peeve: rating HP5, which is a *400* speed film with a generous shoulder at EI 160 to make it look decent. Rodinal is a compensating developer in the first place yielding good speed, and if you have to rate HP5 almost two stop below it's speed to get good negs then clearly there is a problem with the film/developer combination. If I want a 160 speed B/W film, I'll use FP4 at EI 125 vs pulling HP5, which usually results in murky negs that are inferiour to XP2.
    For the Nth frikken time: if you want super sharp negs with Rodinal, use it with Tri-X or Tri-X pro and stop wasting your time with Rodinal and HP5/Delta 400.
     
  14. Scott:

    The results I have gotten from HP+ in Acutol are superb. I do not care for Rodinal on any fast film, Tri-X included, but Acutol is a whole different story.
     
  15. How many times?
     
  16. As someone else wrote, HP5+ rated at 200 in D76 1:1 for 8-9 minutes works great for me as an all around combination when shooting 35mm. Very well controlled grain and smooth tones. This has been a great, flexible film for me.
     
  17. to all...... Rodinal + HP5 isn't my favorite combination but it does 'work'. The grain in Demetrius' example looks to me as though it was a thin Neg. Also, lumping HP5 into the same category doesn't make any sense at all. They are entirely different films. jmpp
    006zH8-16014984.jpg
     
  18. Lex,
    Apologies for the large photo (I didn't thnk it was THAT big).

    I just wanted to be able to show the grain pattern while also showing that there is
    detail.

    That was scanned from a print.

    jmp
     
  19. That soup done ate the cake!
     
  20. Hmmm.. I find this discussion odd because I use rodinal with HP5+ and get some excellent results. Case in point attached Image.
    00H7tE-30891384.jpg
     
  21. Well, I was looking for some grain and did try HP5+ Rodinal combo (also: HP5+ @ 400 ASA w/Rodinol 1+50) and quite I like the results, though i will need to experiment further.
    (I print my images with Condenser enlarger, using point source of light with f2.8/50 El-Nikkor wide-open)
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     

Share This Page