Nearest 5x4" Alternative to XP2

I'm really pleased with the performance and easy printing I'm

getting from using XP2 in my 35mm and 120 cameras. I've been using

this film now for a year and manage to obtain great prints on Ilford

Multigrade RC, printed normally at grade 3.

 

The system won't work for 5x4 since XP2 isnt sold in this format.

I', therefore after any suggestions as to what is the nearest film /

develolper combination in "traditional" emulsions / chemistry,

clearly choosing the correct developer time is also an issue. I

think one of the reasons that the XP2 negs work so well for me is

their wide exposure lattitude which allows flexibility when printing.

 

In the 5x4 format I'm currently shooting Ilford Delta 100 and

developing in Rodinal at 1:25. I've got a stack of un-printed negs

whilst I save up for my 5x4 mixing chamber for the Devere enlarger.

This comination may give me what I want, but any advice would be

appreciated.

In my opinion all films require perfect exposure and development including tri x. For optimum work, all require perfection and non have any tolerence.

 

C 41 films are in a different league all by themselves.

 

If you can not achieve perfection, expose a little more generously and develope less and plan on doing a lot of screwing around in the dark.

 

T Max may require a tad more perfection than anything else, but other than that, thay are all pretty much the same.

I think you have the 'wrong' developer here....see if you can find Ilfosol S. Great for delta 100.Also try delta 400 in Ilford DDX or Xtol. If you like xp2, I don't think you will like Tmax.

Try Delta 100/400 in Dixactol; staining developers give some of the compensating effect

of C41 films.

Politely, if you have a stack of unprinted, but developed, negs, and a working enlarger, I would start making 4x5" contact prints, and seeing if I liked the tones I'm getting. I occasionally make 4x5 cyanotypes, as the negatives are large enough to make a nice print, if the subject matter is right.

 

FWIW, I would also agree with using a different developer. XTol 1:1 works for me in 120, especially with Delta 100 rated at around 64. On the other hand, if you make a few contacts, and like the Rodinal look, then go with it. Still, the first step is that you should make some contacts, and actually see how your negatives look on paper.

Contact sheets are not going to tell you the whole story, though.

 

When you enlarge the Delta negatives you have developed in Rodinal, don't be too shocked if the grain is more pronounced than you expected.

Nothing is perfect. If we all developed and exposed the same, photography would be boring.

 

Also people who care too much about technical pefection, end up with perfectly exposed, perfectly developed, and perfectly boring results.

"perfect" has a different meaning to every individual. so perfect prints don't necessarily mean "the same", or "boring".