Just use HP5+ if cost is an issue. It's a fine film. I prefer to use it with Xtol or DDX, both of which will minimize grain and enhance speed a bit.
Just use HP5+ if cost is an issue. It's a fine film. I prefer to use it with Xtol or DDX, both of which will minimize grain and enhance speed a bit.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
One method to deal with B&W film grain is to limit enlargement to no more than 4x, typically 2x and use the entire film image space allowed. In the case of 5x7 film, holding the enlargement to about 2x and using the full sheet of film yields a 10x14 print then dry mounted to a 16x20 board is big enough for what I'm after. Once the limitation of striving for fine grain has been significantly reduced, this allows a host of high accutance-edge effect developers (HC-110, Rodinal and etc. Personally, do not like fine grain developers at all) to be used with a wider range of films. This affects overall tonality, allows more gradual tonal transitions in print, increased visual perception of definition and improves visual quality of prints.
This is one of the prime reasons why, IMO 4x5 is too small a film format for B&W. 8x10 offers these special qualities too, but it comes with a set of very significant trade-offs. The consideration for fine grain remains along with a host of other limitations that are a result of 4x5 or smaller film format is a reality one needs to accept rather than ever seeking that magical item to cure this issue that does not exist due to the way Nature really is.
While HP-5 (hint, use HP-5 at ISO 200-160) does have limitations as discussed in depth on previous post, it can offer very nice prints... if used properly and it's limitations understood and used as a strength rather than a limitation.
There is no ideal film for every image making situation. IMO, it is better to master the materials and means at hand to achieve what is possible knowing, accepting and utilizing the limitations and strengths of what materials, post process system (developing, print, print mounts and all involved), camera, lens to achieve what can be possible rather than grind and fret over of what the overall system can never allow or do.
Bernice
Bernice,Originally Posted by Bernice Loui
Anyway let me add that personal film rating depends on how we meter. IMHO for portraiture in particular this is important.
We can spot meter in the cheek illuminated by key light or the one illuminated by fill light, or the mean. We can place the cheek at Z-V or Z-VII. We may have a direct light or a difuse one. We can meter incident, but for the key or for the fill... we can meter the glare in the face from key or from rim, andeven we can take the average of the scene with a white or black background.
What I mean is that even if one photographer is rating a film at 200 and another one at 400 it can happen that both would end using the same exposure for an scene.
...but I agree that overexposing a bit (most) negative films works as a safety factor, and perhaps HP5+ could be overexposed 1/3 stop more than TMY if we don't want the HP5 toe footprint.
IMHO at the end we'll need compressed shadows in the print to allow space for mids, then we can compress it in the negative or in the print, but with TMY we should do it in the print...
Regards
Film choice and films "speed" used remains only a fraction of what goes into a finished print.
There remains the entire print making process including print spotting and print mounting before the image is done.
Choice of print paper (VC, fiber, RC or __ ), enlarger and it's light source (cold light, dichroic color with VC paper, multi bulb, condenser, mix box and more), enlarger optics (lens used), print exposure time, print developer (Dektol, two developer and more), toning, washing...
Print exposure, burn, dodge, solorize, flash-fog and numerous other print "performance moves" to alter print rendition.
Then there is print spotting, mat board (color and texture affects the print presentation), position of the print as mounted on the mat board..
Essentially, focusing and sweating too much over a single item can cause myopia to all the other items required to produce a finished print... and these items are interactive with each making varying degrees of contribution to the finished print.
Bernice
this is important... one may see the trees for the forest...
Bernice, I appreciated your view, though the OP never asked about grain, but rather about the differing characteristics of the two films. There are some mighty fine photographers who use 4x5 rather effectively....Among the LF photographer friends of mine, there is much more talk of tonality, than grain size. I am in total agreement with you about the collective characteristics that make the sum total of an image.
And lots of little things eventually all add up. But many of these kinds of questions cannot be answered without a degree of experimentation to decide which film YOU prefer.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks