Ilford HP5+ 400asa 35mm - 36 exp

Product Information

However, while I can’t think of any reason to recommend you don’t use this film for street photography, there is still that one aspect that means you might not want to anyway. And that is that contrast again. Both of these are legendary fine-grain film developers in their own right. Ilford’s DD-X is renowned for how it looks with modern T-Grain films, and is fantastic for pushing film without creating too much grain. But Kodak’s HC-110 is a solution that was built for processing speed, pushing, and lasting forever on the shelf once it’s opened. In fact, this is the developer that’s been a favorite of photojournalists for decades because of its reliability. The new formula doesn’t last as long as the old syrupy version, but if it’s mixed into multiple sealed 250ml bottles or bags, it’ll last just as long as new bottles. Compared to some other films – even some other ISO 400 monochrome films like JCH Street Pan – that have their USPs and are marketed more for specific purposes, HP5 Plus is definitely more of a general use workhorse.

ILFORD HP5 PLUS from EI 800 to EI 6400 Push processing ILFORD HP5 PLUS from EI 800 to EI 6400

I shot my first roll of HP5 PLUS with a Mamiya 645 and I was a bit worried. First of all I was shooting on film for the first time after many years away (I was 18 at the time). I was also shooting on a medium format camera and had decided (for good or bad!) to follow through the entire process from capture to the development and – and after trail and error – to the final printing of the film. As with Tri-X, HP5+’s grain is present, yet not overwhelming . It neither muddies the image nor takes away from fine detail. That said, they also advise their Delta films display less grain, thanks to their tabular-grain emulsion vs. the traditional grain of the Plus range, so you can’t logically expect your results to be super clean with the HP5.Ilford does not list any grain size or image resolution measurements for HP5+ though I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s identical to Tri-X’s RMS 17. I mentioned at the top of this article that HP5 PLUS (well, ILFORD HP), is seen by some as a response to Kodak’s Tri-X 400, so let’s clean that up first.

ILFORD film - Ilford Photo% Choosing your first ILFORD film - Ilford Photo%

I just completed a comparison test of Tri-X and HP5+. The films are nearly identical in sharpness and grain. HP5 + may be a little finer-grained, but it is almost impossible to tell for certain. The films were processed simultaneously in the same tank, developed in Adox FX-39 II developer diluted 1 + 14 for 9.25 mins @ 68F/20C. Note: All HP5+ scans in this article were shot on 35mm film and developed in Ilfotec DD-X which, according to Ilford, develops the finest grain and “best overall image quality.”The results of a poll on the Film Photography Chat Facebook Group. I would have voted DD-X, but didn’t want to taint the results. If I ever had the chance, I’d really want to takeIlford HP5 into the studio and shoot in an extremely controlled environment where the lighting would really allow me to get the images I want. I’d say the same thing about Kodak Portra 400, and for what it’s worth, that isn’t my favorite film for shooting street. I prefer Superia for street photography. But for portraits, I really do enjoy Kodak Portra 400 and a number of the newer Tungsten films that have come out in the past few years. After beginning my Ilford acquaintanceship with the relatively obscure Pan 400, HP5 Plus was my first foray into the brand’s better-known films. Pulling HP5+ is a little harder to do. Many photographers swear by over-exposing every film by one stop, no matter what speed it’s rated to. This is because over-exposing film is more likely to expose every single grain on the roll, creating a fine, ‘dense’ negative. When negatives are under-exposed, the grains that aren’t developed into metallic silver get washed away by the fixer, leaving holes between large silver clusters that make the film look ‘grainy.’ Overexposure fills in those spaces, and make tones across an image change more gradually, with less grain-to-grain contrast, for a smooth, beautiful appearance. If you like this film, you can save a bit of money by buying it as a bulk roll . You’ll need a bulk film loader tool to do this and HP5+ in 50’ or 100’ variety .

Ilford HP5 - A photo comparison by The Kodak Tri-X vs. Ilford HP5 - A photo comparison by The

When you’re using Rodinal large pushes, though, there is a point where it creates too much grain. If you’re underexposing film more than 3 stops, like pushing HP5+ to ISO 6400 (+5 stops) or 12,800 (+6 stops), there comes a point where not enough grains receive proper exposure to make an image, resulting in a huge loss of detail in the shadows of an image. So the developer and fixer will wash away the unexposed grains. This process leaves unexposed holes in between the large grains, causing the negative to appear grainier according to this document written by Kodak scientists about the invention of T-Grain films. If you just look at the ISO 400 box speed, traditional yet fine grain and not overbearing contrast, it would be easy to dismiss HP5 Plus on paper as being an average film with no unique selling proposition. Sharpness is always important on film, which has a few extra requirements than digital. I made a post recently on t he ingenious ways photographers made their images sharp before photoshop was invented. My own collection of Film Developing chemicals currently on the shelf. The box on the left is for colour, and the rest are B&W chems. Which developers are recommended for pulling HP5? If you just want to think about what you want to tell with a photo, it’s best to expose correctly for what you want to show, on 400 ASA and to develop with the times as shown on the box.If you want some details in shadows though, I believe that EI 800 is optimal for push processing. The “true speed” of HP5+ is usually tested around 250 I think (in my case 320) but as I’ve mentioned, when it’s pushed, the film will try to maintain shadow details as much as possible – depending of course on lighting and other factors. A lot of shots did come out on the flatter side as advertised, but when I found myself in environments with good light and shadow too, the HP5 Plus did give me that contrast. It’s said to have very good dynamic range, which means you can trust it whenever you find yourself in a similar spot. This is a really cool process that works to reduce the negative contrast and increase sharpness by allowing the developer to exhaust itself on the highlights while having more time to interact with and develop the shadows.

Ilford HP5+ at Adventurous ASAs - By Kieran Newman - 35mmc

For me, that’s missing the point. I’m not saying it isn’t average. It is, but in a good way rather than bad. Nothing is outstandingly wrong and the attributes just seem to add up to more than the sum of their parts to give clean, sharp, and just really nice to look at results. There are few things to consider while pushing. Contrast increases due to lost detail in shadows, so it’s better to agitate very slowly and carefully. I typically do inversions/rotations initially for 30 seconds and then 1 every half a minute. Timeline wise, the original ILFORD Hypersensitive Panchromatic film was released in plate form in 1931, some nine years before Tri-X’s sheet film debut in 1940 – it was rebranded to “HP” in 1935. If we’re comparing the time between 135/120 format film, ILFORD HP was released in 1935 compared to Tri-X in 1954 – nearly two decades later. We shoot HP5 PLUS because of the one thing it delivers bags of: atmosphere and flexibility to be pulled pushed and generally battered about to fit the needs of the photographer. I have also took a lot of shots pulling the film: excellent results at 3200 ASA and development in Rodinal stand 1 + 100, although for best results developing in ILFOTEC, to lower a little the grain could be the right choice.

If we talk about this in terms of the Zone System for a moment, you’ll be able to capture grey tones across 6-8 concurrent zones with ease depending on where you place those shadows.