[disconnekt]

I got a roll of Ilford HP5 (not the "Plus" version) b&w film, and was woundering if anyone here had any info on it or where I could get info on it? Tried google, but only info for the "Plus" version shows up.

No box came with it, so no idea when it expired.

Attached Images

 

[jbinpg]

A quick google search showed that HP5+ supplanted HP5 around 1992. So if you have a roll of HP5, it is old.

[ismaelg]

Hello,

This Ilford chronology (link) indicates HP5 was launched in 1976 and HP5+ was launched in 1989.
Ilford History and Chronology

In there, there is a link to a pdf of an article on the HP5+ release discussing it, and how it was basically an upgrade to keep up with Kodak's Tri-X as they were the top 2 choices for press use.

http://www.photomemorabilia.co.uk/Ilford/Chronology/HP5+_Photopro_Winter1989-90.pdf

Thanks,
Ismael

[ChrisPlatt]

Once I began exploring films not sold in a yellow box this soon became my favorite.

I shot tons of this film in the early 1980's.
I sure wish Ilford still made old (non- "Plus") HP5!

BTW the old Ilford cassettes were reusable and excellent for bulk-loading.

Chris

[pschlute]

I used to use HP5 in my old MX !

Then I used HP5+. Also Ilford made (and still do) a b+W film (XP2) that had to be processed using C41 , ie colour chemicals.

[aaacb]

Also Ilford made (and still do) a b+W film (XP2) that had to be processed using C41 , ie colour chemicals.

I never understood why this would be desirable, until I noticed how much more expensive it is to get BW processing from the LCS (their C41 prices are particularly good though, compared to online services at least)

[disconnekt]

Once I began exploring films not sold in a yellow box this soon became my favorite.

I shot tons of this film in the early 1980's.
I sure wish Ilford still made old (non- "Plus") HP5!

BTW the old Ilford cassettes were reusable and excellent for bulk-loading.

Chris

Truthfully, I wouldn't be surprised if Ilford was using the old HP5 formula (or a modified version of it) for smaller companys like Ultrafine that sell their own (rebadged) film

That was one of the reasons I bought it, my G.A.S. turned into C.F.T. (Collecting Film Things), which is now collecting old 35mm film cassettes. I already got a Agfachrome 64 & Kodak Plus-X cassettes, now the Ilford one (well once I shoot it & get it back).

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[pschlute]

I never understood why this would be desirable, until I noticed how much more expensive it is to get BW processing from the LCS (their C41 prices are particularly good though, compared to online services at least)

I think you nailed it. When XP2 came out the old camera shops were fast disappearing, being replaced with photo-shops that did automated processing of mainly colour film.

[Papa_Joe]

I never understood why this would be desirable, until I noticed how much more expensive it is to get BW processing from the LCS (their C41 prices are particularly good though, compared to online services at least)

The main reason for the XP2 is that films based on the C41 technology (color films) have a very wide exposure margin of several f-stops, while B&W films have a very limited exposure margin and should be exposed to the point. The Ilford XP2 on the contrary can be exposed in the range of ISO 200 to ISO 800 on the same roll, the individual pictures will have different density and grain, according to the ISO used as base for the exposure.

So far the theory. I still have my XP2s in the box waiting for exposure.

[tuco]

The main reason for the XP2 is that films based on the C41 technology (color films) have a very wide exposure margin of several f-stops, while B&W films have a very limited exposure .

Tabular grain BW films have a wide exposure index too. I have shot 400TMY at EI 50, 100, 400 and 800, for example.

[ChrisPlatt]

You can't shoot vastly different EI's on the same roll however most conventional BW films have pretty good exposure latitude.

Please, let's not scare away any more potential users!

Chris

[tuco]

Kodak says in their 400TX data sheet, for example, that you can shoot it at EI 800 and develop it normally due to its lattitude. That means, yes, on the same roll you can mix shooting at EI 200, 400 and 800 because at EI 200 placing your middle grey exposure up one stop is not that much over exposed for Tri-X most of the time.

[Papa_Joe]

I'am sorry for being inaccurate. Of course you can shoot every B&W film on other ISO then the one it is specified for. But you usually have to develop it accordingly.
And of course higher ISO films have a higher latitude, so that one stop overexposure is no problem at all for a ISO 400 B&W. You just should not do that with every B&W film unless you now what you are doing.

The XP2 on the other side can be developed in the C41 standard process and have the full dynamic range of a comparable negative film at ISO 100 as well as ISO 800 and you can set exposure to ISO 1.600 without running in issues as well. I do not believe you can do that with any B&W film.

The XP2 is for people that want a monochrome film and do not want to bother with self development. And for these it is very versatile.

[ismaelg]

Hello,

We may be getting a bit off topic here from the OP, but back about 20 years ago, local development of B&W as well as color slides were getting hard to find as most places had automated C41 equipment only. That's when C41 monochrome films like Kodak BW400CN were a savior. But then ANY local film processing disappeared about 10 years ago and I am now back to the 70's: mailing my rolls for processing. That means I can go back to true B&W film since I have to mail it anyways. I'd love to, but I don't have the time/space to play with self development.

Thanks,
Ismael

[disconnekt]

Hello,

This Ilford chronology (link) indicates HP5 was launched in 1976 and HP5+ was launched in 1989.
Ilford History and Chronology

In there, there is a link to a pdf of an article on the HP5+ release discussing it, and how it was basically an upgrade to keep up with Kodak's Tri-X as they were the top 2 choices for press use.

http://www.photomemorabilia.co.uk/Ilford/Chronology/HP5+_Photopro_Winter1989-90.pdf

Thanks,
Ismael

Good to see that the developing times between HP5 & HP5+ are the same/didnt change, so when I evetually shoot it & send it out to be developed I can tell the person developing it to use the HP5+ times.