tony_p3 Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 Hi Guys, I've heard that to reduce grain with films like the Ilford XP2 Super 135 (ie Black & White ISO400 negative film C41 processed) that they are better exposed at ISO200 but still developed at ISO400. Anyone had any experience of doing this? Many thanks ... Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_clark Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 It's probably more of a matter of exposing it like any other C-41 film, which is to say expose for the shadows and let the highlights handle themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_scheuern Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 It has gobs of exposure lattitude, especially on the overexposure side, so, yeah, exposing it at EI 200 and developing it normally works and probably does result in a bit less grain (though the grain is pretty fine to begin with, IMO). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimvanson Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 XP2 looks much better (to my eyes) when shot at 200-320. I usually shoot it at 250/320 with my EOS's & 200/250 with my T90's...I've found that the cameras meter differently thus the different settings.<p>XP2 Super has a great glow to it when overexposed and usually a rather hideous look when underexposed...I've NEVERgotten a good print from XP2 Super shot at 800.<p>And to close...I guess you should also consider how you meter or interpert a meters reading...just because my T90 reads 1/125 at 5.6 doesn't mean your F5 is going to give the same reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_p3 Posted September 21, 2003 Author Share Posted September 21, 2003 Hi Guys, Many thanks for your comments. I agree that for negative film the grain is very good at ISO400, I suppose what it does mean for me is that I can pull it to ISO200 on a bright day when I'm taking street shots and not have to worry about pulling the processing. I usually scan the shots on a Minolta Dimage Dual III Scanner, so I am always looking for film that will scan well in addition to traditional printing. I am fortunate that 99% of the time my Nikon in-camera meter reads the same as my Sekonic, the rest of the time there's only 1/2 stop difference. Best Regards ... Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James G. Dainis Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 "<I>I suppose what it does mean for me is that I can pull it to ISO200 on a bright day when I'm taking street shots and not have to worry about pulling the processing.</I>"<P> No, on a bright day if you give one stop more exposure, you will pick up shadow detail (Zone 1 -> Zone 2) but blow out the highlights some more (Zone 8 -> Zone 9). Overexpose and under develop (pull process) would be called for. But in general I rate 400 film at 320 or 320 Tri-X at 160 for more shadow detail. Then, depending on the highlights in the scene, I will develop normally, pull or push. <P> Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights. James G. Dainis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimvanson Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 <i>but blow out the highlights some more (Zone 8 -> Zone 9). Overexpose and under develop (pull process) would be called for...</i><p>James with a conventional silver halide emulsion this would be the case BUT we are talking about a chromogenic and on of a chromogenic's characteristics is that is almost impossible to blow out the highlights.<p><i>...ISO200 on a bright day...</i><p>Is exactly what you want to do as a chromogenic's contrast decreases as you overexpose...so XP2 Super at 200 (even 100) with a flash or in bright sunlight light is <i>much more controllable</i> then silver halide emulsions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich815 Posted September 22, 2003 Share Posted September 22, 2003 The whole idea of better grain when shooting XP2 at 200 in my experience only applies for when you are printing B&W traditionally in a darkroom. I shoot many a roll of XP2 in my darkroom days and always shot it at 200 or 320. But for scanning shooting at thse speeds I find produces a negative that is often a bit too contrasty and "over-developed" for an easy scan. For most B&W, especially the chromogenic films like XP2, I find a less contrasty and slightly flatter negative is more forgiving in the scanning process without blown highlights or too much contrast. Therefore when I'll be scanning the negs (as I do 90% of the time now) I shoot XP2 at 400 myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_p3 Posted September 22, 2003 Author Share Posted September 22, 2003 Hi Guys, Many thanks for the feedback everyone. Looks like I'll be treating it differently depending on if I'm intending to scan or print. I shot a roll on Saturday at ISO400 ( http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=336724 ), but they didn't turn out punchy enough for my liking. I'll try another couple of rolls at different speeds. Thanks once again ... Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjen van de merwe Posted September 24, 2003 Share Posted September 24, 2003 I dont use XP2 super much any more, now I have invested the time to test my conventional film developing. But if I need the fine grain at ISO200 I use it. I find the negs very hard to print if shot at 400, and reasonably printable at ISO200, but still more difficult than conventional film. And I found the same when scanning. It may be the scanner you use, I use a Nikon LS2000. Testing for yourself may be the only option. For me it turned out to be a good learning experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted September 28, 2003 Share Posted September 28, 2003 Don't push or pull the film in the conventional sense. Ilford state you should rate it anywhere between 50 and 800 asa and give it a standard C41 process. Best to experiment with different film speeds and figure out what works for you Tony. I like 320asa. Also this is both the easiest film to scan and print in the darkroom. Have a look at Jim Vansons stuff to see what you can do with XP2 and a scanner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_p3 Posted October 8, 2003 Author Share Posted October 8, 2003 Hi Guys, Did my first wet print tonight using XP2 negatives. Very impressive, easy to print with very fine grain and excellent tonal range. Many thanks Gareth for suggesting I try it and everybody for all your suggestions. Thats the last of HP5+ for me except for course work ;-) ... Tony 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