marisa_suarez Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 New to the site- I've been perusing a ton of threads and find so many varying opinions regarding developers for FP4+ (ISO 125)... I'm capable of processing negs at home and want to stop using my local lab (I'm not getting the best results) I'm using 120 film (a Yashica 124g) and realize that with fine grain, some sharpness is going to be compromised... Has anyone done some conclusive experiments with FP4+ and found a happy medium between fine grain, tonality and sharpness? I know I'm seeking the holy grail... None the less, I would love any input...examples are always wonderful as well ... Thank you in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_madio Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 D-76/ID-11 or XTOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randall ellis Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 This is my main film - I use it for around %85 of what I do and I've found over the years that FP4+ works very well with developers like Rodinal, FX-2, and even FX-1, developers that are not solvent-type developers. Since you're working with medium format film, you won't see much of a problem with grain unless you print really large, so don't worry overly about that aspect. I've found that FX-2 and Rodinal have very nice tonality with this film using both 'standard' development and stand development. FP4+ does well with more middle of the road developers (not acutance, but not overly fine-grained) like ID-11, D-76, etc., too, but my preference is certainly for Rodinal 1:100, closely followed by FX-2. - Randy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepperez Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Hola Marisa, yo utilizo siempre Ilfosol-S con muy buenos resultados. Tambi鮠con 120. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conrad_hoffman Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 FP4+ is my favorite film. IMO, it's pretty insensitive and lots of developers work well with it. The key to quality is recognizing that it won't give good shadow detail and tonality when shot at box speed of 125. You need to start someplace around EI 64-80 and back off the development about 10%. D-76/ID-11 is a good choice, Xtol and HC-110 work fine. Rodinal is known for its distinct look, but with FP4+, it's a myth. If you get the development time adjusted for the exact same contrast as for D-76, it will look exactly like D-76! Most people underexpose and overdevelop when using Rodinal because the development times on the box are for a very high contrast. Over the years I've come to appreciate non-solvent developers, and prefer fine grain, but very sharp fine grain. That usually means using the higher dilutions for D-76 and Xtol, or the use of an acutance developer like FX2 or FX37. *But* if you're scanning the film, this isn't the way to go- stick with solvent developers at minimal dilution. Remember that in 120, grain won't be much of an issue except for very large prints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_502260 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 FP4+ is not insensitive. It will look different in different developers. It will be much more grainy in Rodinal at any dilution than in D-76 straight or 1:1. FP4+ will give fine shadow detail at 125 if you meter properly and use the right developer. You can get an even higher speed than 125 in Ilford Microphen. Some of my best results with FP4+ have been with AMALOCO AM74 1:15. If you can get AM74 you will love the result. Other good developers for FP4+ are NACCO Super 76, Clayton F60, Ilford ID11, Ilford DD-X, Edwal FG-7 1:15 (in water or 9% sodium sulfite solution), X-tol. I don't really care for FP4+ in Rodinal. You lose speed and gain grain. What about sharpness? I don't find that FP4+ in Rodinal is sharper than in most of the other developers. If you like to tinker and make your own developer then PC-TEA is very nice. Both Microdol-X and Perceptl will cause a loss of about one stop of speed if used undiluted. When diluted 1:3 they make economincal developers with high sharpness and full box speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark f Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 FP4+ is my favorite. If you go though enough film, xtol is my favorite for grain and tonality. If you only do a few rolls a month, HC110 would be better. Fresh mixed HC110 is extremely consistant and can be mixed just before you use it. I've recently standardized on HC110 because I know that my developer is always fresh and will behave as I expect it to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pics Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I love it in Pyrocat-HD. All the photos in my portfolio shot on FP4+ were done with this combo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanky Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Conrad is right about the high development times given for Rodinal. I used a lot of 120 size fp4 in Rodinal and never could figure out why my skies kept getting blocked up until I cut back on both development and agitation. Once I run out of my stash of APX100 I'll go back to fp4 as my main medium speed film. The image below was fp4 rated 125 and souped in Rodinal 1+50 for nine minutes.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian steinberger Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Marisa, FP4 works beautifully in ID-11 1:3 for 19 mintues at 68 degrees agitating for the first full minute, then once per minute for 10 seconds. I have also recently begun developing it in Pyrocat HD with beautiful results. I suggest starting with ID-11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnashings Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 FP4+ is one of my favorite films, and in that speed range, probably my favorite and most used film. I almost always soup it in Rodinal 1+50 - I like the look, and the grain does not bother me at all. But, I am not blind to the fact that its not the most fine grained combo. I think you would be very happy with D76 1+1 - its a nice compromise that gives pretty sharp negs and very tight grain, as well as being easy to obtain and use. I would also suggest it as a great starting point (ID11 is just about the same thing, only from Ilford instead of Kodak). Frankly, in 120, I never bother with anything other than Rodinal, the only time I tried for anything else is when I needed a tighter grain look from 35mm and still wanted to get the look of FP4+. Congrats on making the move to dev your own - you will be blown away by the results and especially the control and creative avenues that it opens to you. At the end of the day, you may have to get a bunch of developers and just see what you happen to like best - but the simple, tried and true options are probably the best starting point. Best of luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_waller Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 I have rediscovered FP4 after a break of many years. I rate it at 50 ASA (for very bright conditions) and dev in Rodinal 1:50, 20 C, 9 minutes. FP4 gives good results with most developers. It is intrinsically very sharp and thus performs well with solvent developers. It gives excellent results in Perceptol.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue_sun408 Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Hi Marisa. When I use FP4+, I rate it at 80 asa and then soup it in XTol (1:1). I get excellent tonality and great sharpness. If you want a little more contrast with slightly less sharpness, then just use it straight (1:0). I have found that FP4+ is a very forgiving film, exhibiting very good latitude with regards to exposure. If I were you, I would shoot a test roll of a consistently lit subject (bracketing exposure), then cut the film in half and develop each half using the above two suggestions and then compare results by making a print from each of the two closest exposures. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiyen Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Wow, you're getting EI 80 in XTOL? That's what I get in Rodinal 1+50 and I've always heard that XTOL gives a film speed boost... a few comments earlier were very right on - developed to the same contrast, you get very similar looks from just about any developer. Yes, there are differences in grain, and slight differences in toe and shoulder, but if you get exposure right and development right to the same contrast and rough curve, multiple developers will look the same. Anyway. FP4 is a very versatile film for me. if I didn't have enough other 100ish films stocked up, I'd ask my wife if it were okay to buy a ton of fp4 right now :-). Try it in perceptol, too, for scenes where you don't need a ton of sharpness. The smooth tones are fantastic. allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_shively Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Any--repeat: ANY--of the standard developers out there will do a good job on FP4. That includes ID11/D76 1:1 or 1:3, Perceptol/Microdol-X 1:3, Rodinal (pick a dilution), etc. You will probably need to adjust exposure and development to suit your tastes and methods. Start by shooting it at 100 or 125 and process using data from Ilford's time/temp tables. If you're like me, you'll probably end up reducing the processing time--I find my negatives are too dense using Ilford's times. There is no Holy Grail or Silver Bullet but there is a reason "standard" developers became standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm1 Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 May I come in with an extra question? I use Tmax 100 and Xtol 1:1 for some years, there is practically no grain, sharpness is good. But now for some portrait work I would like to get that kind of old-fashioned look that Tmax films and Deltas do not have, but, of course, this is a 'mission impossible' as I do not want to end with results that show more grain as I often do very large prints from my 35mm negs. Those of you who use FP4+ with Xtol 1:1, did you ever compare with Tmax 100 in the same developer? Is there a visible difference in grain when making very large prints? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javi_l1 Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 You will definetly find more grain but you may like white you see anyway. I moved away from Tmax because grain isn't all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc_w Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I use FP4 in 120, 4x5, 4x7, 8x10. After testing, I rate it at ASA 100. I develop in a rotary processor with HC-110 at different dilutions (D, E, and F) to control contrast. I am happy with the grain and sharpness, and I find the tonal gradation very smooth. HP5 is more grainy with the same developer and method. Mind you, I use HC-110 for everything so I can't really compare. If you like, I can send you a few examples. In my opinion, the developing time (which will be quite different with different methods, such as rotary vs tray) is very important. I have found that longer development increases graininess, but I have not thoroughly tested that impression. It really is just an impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conrad_hoffman Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Clemens- IMO you should pick up a classic 6x6 TLR like an Autocord, Rollei, or Yashica. Shoot FP4+ and you'll be amazed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big toys are better Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 For those seeking high accutance, the Rodinal or FX-2 (try Formulary's TFX-2) is great for large format and acceptable in MF. I'm not fond of undiluted solvent developers so using their higher dilutions in XTOL, HC-110 or D-76 are IMHO a better way to go, especially with brighter/contrastier scenes (where EI should be downrated to 50-64 and agitation reduced). Fine grain developers ought only be used when one is looking for the softer effects of the strong solvent action. Since most of my work nowadays is in LF or MF, I pretty much stick to Rodinal at various dilutions and agitation schemes designed to build up good shadow and midtone content without blowing out the highlights. I am considering using a solvent developer like HC-110 or one of Clayton's liquid choices as an alternative to mixing dry chemicals for some of my MF and any 35mm stuff I may do, and those I will mostly use at the higher dilutions for the same reasons I dilute Rodinal-- accutance and compensation for the shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josepmiro Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 FP4+ y HP5+ son mis pelí£µlas preferidas. Con FP4+ he usado durante mucho tiempo Ilfosol-S así £omo Rodinal... hasta que descubrí �MK, basado en Pyrogallol. Con este tipo de reveladores, ademá³ de conseguir densidad por la propia plata de la emulsi�n, se consigue tambié® por la oxidaci�n de la gelatina, la cual es proporcional a la cantidad de plata. Hasta ahora, no he probado ning�n otro revelador que me dé µnos resultados tan buenos como PMK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machts gut Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Another example of FP4+ in D-76 (1+1). I love it for portraits. Stefan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now