HP5+ Rating and Development Confusion

[russel_grainger]

<p>Hi guys I'm confused on a few things. <br>

Im just about to load a roll of 35mm hp5+ into my camera and Im unsure how to rate it ?<br>

I have heard/read to rate it at 320iso and not box speed. Why is this ? <br>

Also if rating it at 320iso is the way to go how come the so called massive dev chart does not have this combo for such a popular film and my developer of choice "Agfa Rodinal" ? (The original stuff a school teacher had some unopened bottles and gave them to me)<br>

I have also heard to rate the film at 320iso and develop it for the times i find for this film at 400iso.<br>

Which is correct ?<br>

Sorry to ask but I would love to hear your times/recommendations for this film and this developer if possible. <br>

Im also using a yellow filter on the front and shooting pretty but all outdoors.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>Film sensitivity ratings are determined in a lab using equipment maintained to tight tolerances. Most shutters in cameras and lens operate at a 20% tolerance for speeds 1/100 and slower and 30% tolerance for speeds 1/125 and faster which translates into 1/3 stop. Shutters generally run slower than their marked speed. Factor in meter error and aperture inaccuracy due to focal length variance and you get a slight exposure error when using box speed. The slight exposure variance that results from lab to use environment results is deep shadows with little to no detail. Exposing at EI320 for ISO400 film gives more exposure that results in detail in the deep shadows without blowing out the highlights when developed at the times for ISO400. A third stop change in development is around 1% or 2% of the box speed development time. You could expose at EI250 and still develop at box speed times without any highlight problems but a 5% cut in developing time might be best. Exposing HP5+ at EI200 you should cut development time by 10%.<br>

It is best to test your camera/lens combination to determine if any compensation is needed. Shoot a roll of film, 35mm and 120 formats, bracketing .5 stop either side of metered at box speed , develop at times for box speed, then evaluate the results by printing all frames at the same exposure as auto exposure systems may/will mask the subtle differences between the exposures or scan all at the same manual settings.</p>

<p>A wet print contact sheet at paper black will tell the most about the difference in exposures.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>Russel, hi.<br>

I am an Ilford/Rodinal user. I used to use a lot of HP5 and dev in Rodinal. It's fine to rate it at 320 and dev as for 400 - the difference is negligible. Typically, I rate HP5 at 160 ASA and dev it in Rodinal 1/50, 20 C, 9minutes. (That's for a diffuser head enlarger.)</p>

[Craig_Cooper11664875449]

<p>Im a big HP5+ user and to show another view, I prefer to shoot it at an EI of 640 but develop in a speed enhancing developer like DD-X and extend recommended 400 speed development times by around 15%. The thing with B&W films is that the recommendations are really only a starting point. Also consider that there's a good chance your thermometer is slightly out - I have 2 and there's a 1 degree difference between them.<br>

But if I ever shoot it at 320, I just develop at box speed - 320 is only a 1/3 stop over exposed and really is only giving you some buffering on your exposure. However, if it were transparencies, then you would see a difference</p>

[scotty_elmslie]

<p>Don't stress over film speed. The manufacturers' recommendations are a good starting point and if you find that you are not getting enough shadow detail you can use a lower speed next time. But are you really using HP5 to get shadow detail? Probably not for 35mm film.</p>

<p>Most camera shutters are fairly precise (consistent and repeatable) even if they are not always accurate at higher indicated speeds where they tend to be a little slower than indicated. This is especially true for leaf shutters. A show shutter will compound any de-rating you may have applied to the film speed.</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p>IMO, generally, what speed you "rate" a film (also known as what Exposure Index or EI you use) in truth and in fact should depend on how you plan to develop it. Some developers tend to get more real speed out of films than others; each film-and-developer combination has its own (usually minor) particular quirks. So HP5+ might have a real speed of, say, 160, 200, or 250 when developed for normal contrast in Rodinal 1+50--and it might have a real speed of, say, 500 when developed for normal contrast in DD-X 1+4. Although getting a <em>precise</em> answer involves sophisticated equipment and adherence to a detailed ISO standard testing procedure, you can get a pretty good answer based on your own experience and that of others.</p>

<p>Beyond that, in specific circumstances, there are many other reasons why a person might rate a film at a relatively higher or lower EI for reasons other than the way the film reacts first to light and then to developer. Many of them are discussed above, and include ambient light quality and quantity, metering technique, meter performance, shutter performance, subject darkness / lightness / reflectance, graininess in shadows, aesthetic choices, etc.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Depends on the results you want. HP5+ can do it all. It's a very versatile film, equal in every way to Tri-X but with its own unique qualities. In my opinion, the current version of HP5+ is more like the old version (pre-2000s) of Tri-X. The current version of Tri-X seems more T-Maxy.</p>

<p>If you want moderate contrast, classic continuous tones and full shadow detail, rate it at EI 200 and soup in ID-11 1+1 for around 9 minutes, depending on scene contrast. Remarkably fine grain. I used this a lot for handheld daylight photos of landscapes where I didn't want to be tied down to a tripod. The EI 200 rating gave me a bit faster shutter speed than T-Max 100, Pan F+, etc., so I didn't need to lug a tripod while I was walking around the countryside. In prints up to 11x14 from 35mm, the grain was very fine.</p>

<p>If you want contrasty, grainy, dramatic stuff, push to 800-1600 and soup in Microphen 1+1. HP5+ starts getting gritty and funky by EI 800 in Rodinal, which can be a good look for some stuff.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>Just rate it at the box speed and develop it according to the chart.<br /><br />Rating a film at something other than its official speed is something you do after you've been doing it according to the book for a while and decide you don't like the results. Film manufacturers do extensive testing to come up with the official speed and development times, and for most people they work just fine. if you're just starting out, do what the manufacturer says to do until you decide there's a reason to do otherwise.</p>

[russel_grainger]

<p>Thanks so much for the info ill take it all onboard, sadly I won't be buying any new or different developers soon as I have 2 litres of original Agfa Rodinal I have to get through first.<br>

Just out of curiosity, Ill be scanning the majority of my negs should I be developing my negs differently for scanning over using an enlarger ?</p>

[scotty_elmslie]

<p>Develop the negatives normally for scanning. Depending on which scanner you are using, it might compensate for small errors in exposure or development time. </p>

<p>For Rodinal and HP5 (or any other film) I would recommend a fairly dilute mixture (1+50 or 1+75) if you are concerned about grain. But if you like grain, 1+25 should be OK. </p>

<p>You don't have to be too concerned about temperature. It works fine at about 75F if you shorten the recommended development by about 35%. This will help with the high dilutions.</p>

<p>It's going to take you a long time to run though 2 liters of Rodinal.</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p><em>hould I be developing my negs differently for scanning over using an enlarger ?</em></p>

<p>Most people find that scanning works better if the negatives are slightly less dense, so you might want to try reducing developing time 10% or 20% compared to what you'd use for an optical enlarger. But of course what developing you use with an optical enlarger depends on what light source etc.--condenser versus diffuser, etc.</p>

<p><em>I have 2 litres of original Agfa Rodinal I have to get through ....</em></p>

<p>You will probably find that HP5+ in Rodinal gives better results shot at around 200 than at 400 or even 320. Rodinal produces some of the slowest true speed (shadow detail) of any common developer. I always found I got better results when using Rodinal by de-rating the film speed at least 2/3 of a stop from the nominal ("box") speed.</p>

 

[Fotohuis RoVo]

<p>With most films you will loose 1/3F-2/3F-stop in Rodinal / R09. HP5+ is not different. The regular dilution for Rodinal is 1+50 with a minimum of concentrate of 5-5,5ml for each 135-36 or 120 roll film.</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>Try it at 400 with normal development so you have a standard then try it at 200 with 25% less development.<br>

This should give you a bit more shadow detail. Compare them to see which (if any) you prefer.</p>