Ilford HP5+: round 2, pushed to 1600.

CSoars · 02-22-2009, 11:08 PM

Another one of my 'film result' threads.

Rated @ ISO 1600, 13 minutes in DD-X 1:4 at 20 degrees C.

Careful development, and a new scan/pp flow makes the grain size very nice for the speed. I'm really quite impressed with resolution and tonality, especially in the 2nd shot (dingy back room). Trusty SMC M 50mm 1.7, Asahi Pentax MX.

Probably as grainy as some earlier attempts shooting at ISO 400.

dantekgeek · 02-22-2009, 11:24 PM

Simply *gorgeous* grain! Gives the shot texture, but keeps the detail!

ryan s · 02-22-2009, 11:51 PM

Not bad...not bad at all. Gotta love the little check boxes on the canister for 400, 800, or 1600...Ilford was really thinking ahead

Also a fine choice for developer...DD-X is meant for this type of thing

artobest · 02-23-2009, 04:25 AM

Beautiful tone, especially on that metal pump doohickey in the second shot. I love the way metallic objects look in black and white. I do wonder though whether both scans, but especially the first, are slightly high-key - there looks to be some clipping there. Hard to tell with the web compression, mind.

**Lowell Goudge** · 02-23-2009, 07:32 AM

You can go further, based upon what I see here.

Next step, 3200 ISO.

Both of these were shot with Tri-X and developed with D76 (about 20 years ago)

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...ain-grain2.jpg

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...rain-grain.jpg

k100d · 02-23-2009, 07:41 AM

nice nice ... very nice

Jimfear · 02-23-2009, 07:41 AM

Really beautiful grain! And the shocking thing is that there's less grain in these shots than in my attempt at developing HP5+ @ ISO 400...

Btw, can anyone give me a quick answer to if Rodinal is any good for pushing film?

CSoars · 02-23-2009, 09:22 AM

Thanks everyone for the comments, I'm still a little surprised at the results, but in a good way. I have some other shots with more DOF, taken in indirect sunlight; they look as grainy as most of the popular tri-x 'street photos' (authentic or photoshop texture) that you can find on the web.

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

You can go further, based upon what I see here.

Next step, 3200 ISO.

Both of these were shot with Tri-X and developed with D76 (about 20 years ago)

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...ain-grain2.jpg

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...rain-grain.jpg

It's a shame my MX's meter doesn't go past 1600, though I know it's not a hardship to extrapolate. But my LX goes higher.... hrm. Might need to bring along an ND filter though.

Originally posted by Jimfear

Really beautiful grain! And the shocking thing is that there's less grain in these shots than in my attempt at developing HP5+ @ ISO 400...

Btw, can anyone give me a quick answer to if Rodinal is any good for pushing film?

Likewise, though turning off 'unsharp mask: medium' in scanning helped. The people on the photo.net forums don't seem to keen on rodinal to push film. Apparently it ramps up the contrast too much, but I've never used it, so...

Ratmagiclady · 02-23-2009, 10:13 AM

Hey, I'm kind of liking that.

If I can get some qualities like I see out of DD-X, particularly with that pushing, I could just go back to HP5, after all. (I've been shopping around for a new 'look' the past couple of years, and would really like to simplify film and developer stocks, compared to what I've come up with so far.

)

Gooshin · 02-23-2009, 10:16 AM

i'm observing that when pushing, you lose alot of highlights

with the bike-chain picture, while the sharpness and grey-area grain is perfect, there is a lot of white, with rather harsh transitions.

CSoars · 02-23-2009, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Gooshin

i'm observing that when pushing, you lose alot of highlights

with the bike-chain picture, while the sharpness and grey-area grain is perfect, there is a lot of white, with rather harsh transitions.

Pushing definitely compresses the dynamic range, and that first picture was backlit by a window, so I opened up (perhaps a bit too much) to expose the chainring. The white bits are likely sunlight shining off polished metal, which even slow color film (see my 160C thread) or digital would have difficulty rendering.

What I find interesting about grain is how it's rendered in focused areas v.s. out of focus; the chain disappears into an almost graphic stippling effect, while the teeth look quite sharp and well formed.

artobest · 02-23-2009, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by CSoars

Pushing definitely compresses the dynamic range, and that first picture was backlit by a window, so I opened up (perhaps a bit too much) to expose the chainring. The white bits are likely sunlight shining off polished metal, which even slow color film (see my 160C thread) or digital would have difficulty rendering.

Have you checked your levels on that scan? Or alternatively tried rescanning? It does look clipped to my eyes.

k100d · 02-23-2009, 11:16 AM

pushing increases contrast, which reduces dynamic range

lithos · 02-23-2009, 09:08 PM

I try to like this film. I really try. But I can't, especially at 1600 - deities know what the 3200 roll I've got is gonna turn out like.

Ilford's tones always seem to remind of old...well, England. And dark, rotting wood. Something just don't gel with me, on most of their films.

CSoars · 02-23-2009, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by lithos

I try to like this film. I really try. But I can't, especially at 1600 - deities know what the 3200 roll I've got is gonna turn out like.

Ilford's tones always seem to remind of old...well, England. And dark, rotting wood. Something just don't gel with me, on most of their films.

Maybe, I remember early Delta 400 I developed seemed muddy and dank and.... Nothing like the 'lightness' of Tri-X 400.

Still trying to decide, I'm liking HP5+ more and more. Is this dark and rotting?

02-22-2009, 11:08 PM	#1
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322	Ilford HP5+: round 2, pushed to 1600. Another one of my 'film result' threads. Rated @ ISO 1600, 13 minutes in DD-X 1:4 at 20 degrees C. Careful development, and a new scan/pp flow makes the grain size very nice for the speed. I'm really quite impressed with resolution and tonality, especially in the 2nd shot (dingy back room). Trusty SMC M 50mm 1.7, Asahi Pentax MX. Probably as grainy as some earlier attempts shooting at ISO 400.

02-23-2009, 09:22 AM	#8
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322 Original Poster	Thanks everyone for the comments, I'm still a little surprised at the results, but in a good way. I have some other shots with more DOF, taken in indirect sunlight; they look as grainy as most of the popular tri-x 'street photos' (authentic or photoshop texture) that you can find on the web. Originally posted by Lowell Goudge You can go further, based upon what I see here. Next step, 3200 ISO. Both of these were shot with Tri-X and developed with D76 (about 20 years ago) https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...ain-grain2.jpg https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...rain-grain.jpg It's a shame my MX's meter doesn't go past 1600, though I know it's not a hardship to extrapolate. But my LX goes higher.... hrm. Might need to bring along an ND filter though. Originally posted by Jimfear Really beautiful grain! And the shocking thing is that there's less grain in these shots than in my attempt at developing HP5+ @ ISO 400... Btw, can anyone give me a quick answer to if Rodinal is any good for pushing film? Likewise, though turning off 'unsharp mask: medium' in scanning helped. The people on the photo.net forums don't seem to keen on rodinal to push film. Apparently it ramps up the contrast too much, but I've never used it, so... Last edited by CSoars; 02-23-2009 at 09:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ilford Delta 3200 - shoot at 800-1600, develop at 1600?	dugrant153	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	15	11-08-2010 02:27 AM
People 400 ISO pushed to 1600	icywarm	Post Your Photos!	3	07-16-2010 10:31 PM
Ilford HP5 400 temperature	bnishanth	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	8	03-02-2009 03:50 PM
Ilford HP5 shots	Gooshin	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	01-17-2009 01:50 PM
Shot some Ilford HP5 Plus (2 sample shots)	CSoars	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	15	01-12-2009 10:24 AM

02-22-2009, 11:24 PM	#2
dantekgeek Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: NYC Posts: 100	Simply gorgeous grain! Gives the shot texture, but keeps the detail!

02-22-2009, 11:51 PM	#3
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Not bad...not bad at all. Gotta love the little check boxes on the canister for 400, 800, or 1600...Ilford was really thinking ahead Also a fine choice for developer...DD-X is meant for this type of thing

02-23-2009, 04:25 AM	#4
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455	Beautiful tone, especially on that metal pump doohickey in the second shot. I love the way metallic objects look in black and white. I do wonder though whether both scans, but especially the first, are slightly high-key - there looks to be some clipping there. Hard to tell with the web compression, mind.

02-23-2009, 07:32 AM	#5
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	You can go further, based upon what I see here. Next step, 3200 ISO. Both of these were shot with Tri-X and developed with D76 (about 20 years ago) https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...ain-grain2.jpg https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-film-slr-discussion/21...rain-grain.jpg

02-23-2009, 07:41 AM	#6
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	nice nice ... very nice

02-23-2009, 07:41 AM	#7
Jimfear Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 576	Really beautiful grain! And the shocking thing is that there's less grain in these shots than in my attempt at developing HP5+ @ ISO 400... Btw, can anyone give me a quick answer to if Rodinal is any good for pushing film?

02-23-2009, 10:13 AM	#9
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Hey, I'm kind of liking that. If I can get some qualities like I see out of DD-X, particularly with that pushing, I could just go back to HP5, after all. (I've been shopping around for a new 'look' the past couple of years, and would really like to simplify film and developer stocks, compared to what I've come up with so far. )

02-23-2009, 10:16 AM	#10
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	i'm observing that when pushing, you lose alot of highlights with the bike-chain picture, while the sharpness and grey-area grain is perfect, there is a lot of white, with rather harsh transitions.

02-23-2009, 10:35 AM	#11
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322 Original Poster	Originally posted by Gooshin i'm observing that when pushing, you lose alot of highlights with the bike-chain picture, while the sharpness and grey-area grain is perfect, there is a lot of white, with rather harsh transitions. Pushing definitely compresses the dynamic range, and that first picture was backlit by a window, so I opened up (perhaps a bit too much) to expose the chainring. The white bits are likely sunlight shining off polished metal, which even slow color film (see my 160C thread) or digital would have difficulty rendering. What I find interesting about grain is how it's rendered in focused areas v.s. out of focus; the chain disappears into an almost graphic stippling effect, while the teeth look quite sharp and well formed.

02-23-2009, 10:43 AM	#12
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455	Originally posted by CSoars Pushing definitely compresses the dynamic range, and that first picture was backlit by a window, so I opened up (perhaps a bit too much) to expose the chainring. The white bits are likely sunlight shining off polished metal, which even slow color film (see my 160C thread) or digital would have difficulty rendering. Have you checked your levels on that scan? Or alternatively tried rescanning? It does look clipped to my eyes.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-23-2009, 11:16 AM	#13
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	pushing increases contrast, which reduces dynamic range

02-23-2009, 09:08 PM	#14
lithos Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS Posts: 3,261	I try to like this film. I really try. But I can't, especially at 1600 - deities know what the 3200 roll I've got is gonna turn out like. Ilford's tones always seem to remind of old...well, England. And dark, rotting wood. Something just don't gel with me, on most of their films.

02-23-2009, 09:43 PM	#15
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322 Original Poster	Originally posted by lithos I try to like this film. I really try. But I can't, especially at 1600 - deities know what the 3200 roll I've got is gonna turn out like. Ilford's tones always seem to remind of old...well, England. And dark, rotting wood. Something just don't gel with me, on most of their films. Maybe, I remember early Delta 400 I developed seemed muddy and dank and.... Nothing like the 'lightness' of Tri-X 400. Still trying to decide, I'm liking HP5+ more and more. Is this dark and rotting?