Develop for sharpness and fine grain with FP4+

[rpagliari]

I'm interested about experimenting with the Ilford FP4+ (4x5 and 16x7).

I've found very different views on it, some say it is significantly grainier than tmax and ilford delta, some say it isn't. They obviously follow different developing techniques.

Could anyone recommend me a procedure for getting fine grain and the most sharpness out of it (possibly with ddx or rodinal developer)?

Thank you,

[Corran]

Pyrocat

[Michael Kadillak]

I recently processed some FP4+ in rolls and in 8x10 sheets with DDX and it produced excellent sharp negatives to my satisfaction. The 120 rolls I developed in a tank and I used the 1:4 and used regular inversion agitation method followed the guidelines from Ilford which were quite on the money. I tray developed some FP4+ 8x10 negatives in a tray i:4 as well and again it produced excellent negatives. I am assuming you are developing sheets so either tanks of trays would work well.

Not disagreeing with the pyrocat suggestion as I mix it 3.5 liters at a time and use it extensively. However experimentation should be quick and easy and there is nothing that meets these guidelines as efficiently as a concentrate developer 1:4 using the manufacturers recommended product line and DDX fits that billing.

[koraks]

Pyrocat

Agreed.

Also, FP4+ is significantly larger in grain than TMX or Delta100, but in sheet film, it'll be hard to see the grain anyway unless you enlarge to a rather phenomenal size. So who cares, I'd say.

[Pere Casals]

(possibly with ddx or rodinal developer)?

In LF you won't notice much sharpness effect from developer...


From Kodak, see Xtol balance of sharpness-grain
191489

This is Xtol vs Rodinal for P3200, that exagerates the effect, but...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSvQh17SxkE


Also Xtol has very low toxicity and it is environmentally friendly.

[Jim Noel]

Pyrocat and keep all temps within 1 degree F, including wash.

[Bernice Loui]

Can have one or the other, mixed if both is expected.

Likely going to get !!!! for this, but if one moves up to 5x7 or 8x10 or larger film size, the issue of grain on print is greatly diminished for an enlarged print of not more than 4x. IMO, 4x5 is too small a film format for anything larger than 11x14 due to film grain -vs- developer -vs- print visual quality tradeoff. Going for a high acutance developer which over develops the edges of the film grains tends to produce an edge effect when printed causing the perception of greater definition. Never liked "fine grain" developers as they tend to mush out these edges resulting in a lack of edge definition.

Rodinal, HC-110 are traditional developers that are not fine grain but can produce results like this.
Or mix developers per Photo Lab Index or from this book Developing by C.J. Jacobson:
https://archive.org/details/DevelopingTheNegativeTechnique/page/n4

One of the prime advantages of sheet film for B&W is greatly reduced concern with visible grain in the finished print, this is why sheet film can work so
well for silver gelatin B&W prints. Again, IMO, 4x5 is too small a film format to fully exploit the advantages of what can be accomplished in B&W prints.

What works for B&W roll film might not transfer well to sheet film as they are different with different advantages, disadvantages and trade offs.


Bernice



I'm interested about experimenting with the Ilford FP4+ (4x5 and 16x7).

I've found very different views on it, some say it is significantly grainier than tmax and ilford delta, some say it isn't. They obviously follow different developing techniques.

Could anyone recommend me a procedure for getting fine grain and the most sharpness out of it (possibly with ddx or rodinal developer)?

Thank you,

[Andrew O'Neill]

Pyrocat-HD. Agitation 5 sec every minute. Bob's yur uncle.

[Bruce Watson]

Could anyone recommend me a procedure for getting fine grain and the most sharpness out of it (possibly with ddx or rodinal developer)?

There are acutance developers (sharpness) and solvent developers (small grain). Trying to optimize both sharpness and fine grain at the same time is... difficult. Perhaps the "easy" way if there is one is to use a solvent developer like XTOL and dilute it at least 1:1. This worked for me when I was developing Tri-X in XTOL 1:3, but I've not used XTOL with FP4+.

But one of the joys of LF is that graininess isn't ever really an issue, unless you are making some seriously big prints. And for that matter, acutance isn't really much of an issue either. Focus is however, especially when the location of the plane of sharp focus is a variable. :rolleyes:

[Greg Y]

FP4+ is pretty much my standard film, developed in Pyrocat HD, both for roll film & sheet film. Rodinal is not a fine grain developer. FP4 is a traditional emulsion film, as compared with the T grain films like Delta & TMax. Apart from grain size/shape difference, FP4+ has great tonal characteristics which many appreciate in the final prints.
Bernice, you do know how to get attention. "Again, IMO, 4x5 is too small a film format to fully exploit the advantages of what can be accomplished in B&W prints." There are an awful lot of lovely prints made from 4x5...let alone medium format & 35mm film....

191503 A. Adams Contax 35mm

[Corran]

Indeed.


Likely going to get !!!! for this, but if one moves up to 5x7 or 8x10 or larger film size, the issue of grain on print is greatly diminished for an enlarged print of not more than 4x. IMO, 4x5 is too small a film format for anything larger than 11x14 due to film grain -vs- developer -vs- print visual quality tradeoff.

When enlarging T-Max 100 4x5 negatives to 16x20 and 20x24, I have a hard time focusing the grain because it's almost invisible at 4-5x.

IMO, anything past 4x5 gives NO real benefit for enlargements - while also vastly increasing cost and complexity when it comes to the enlarger needs. The trade-offs between size of film and resolution loss due to further stopping down needed to get the same DOF makes it all come out mostly equal. Larger formats are best for contact printing.

[DarekP]

Indeed.
When enlarging T-Max 100 4x5 negatives to 16x20 and 20x24, I have a hard time focusing the grain because it's almost invisible at 4-5
I agree. I have develop T-Max 100 - (135 !!!) in Pyrocat HD. I have problems too with grain focusing by 12x16 inch (12 times enlarging)

[Doremus Scudder]

I'm happy to get fairly grain-free 16x20s from 4x5 negatives. N+ negatives almost always show some grain at that size. At 20x24, there's always some grain, but at normal viewing distances for that size of print, it is unnoticeable.

That said, I'm not worried about a bit of grain in my prints; they are photographs, after all... I do use faster film; 320 Tri-X and 400 TMax films mostly since I find I need the extra stop or so do deal with subject movement and DoF. TMax 100 would likely give pretty grain-free 16x20s.

For the kind of work I do, hiking over rough terrain, in canyons, scrambling over rocks in the field, or bicycling around the city with my camera, lenses and tripod, 4x5 is the perfect size for me. I just couldn't do all of that with a larger camera; heck, many 4x5s are way to heavy for what I do.

11x14-inch prints are my "standard" size. There's absolutely no way I could lug an 11x14 camera around to the places I go.

Best,

Doremus

[Mark Sampson]

In 2010, I thought that it was time for a change from the Tri-X Pan Professional I'd been shooting since 1981. So I ran the exposure/development tests with FP4+ and Pyrocat HD... the results were all I could hope for: beautiful tonality, very sharp and grain-free. That's been my preferred setup since. Although I was recently given a quantity of outdated TMX-100, and will use that until it's gone, I will return to FP4+ and Pyrocat-HD.

[esearing]

Dilute Pyrocat M and Minimal agitation/ long development times for control of normal to high contrast scenes. Lovely gradients with acutance.
HC110 1+63 agitation every 2 minutes for more punch in low contrast scenes.

[Drew Wiley]

If you define "sharpness" in relation to edge acutance, that can affect your developer decision. I prefer PMK pyro for FP4 sheet film for a combination of traits, in which excellent acutance is just one. A developer which I previously used was Perceptol. When used at the usual 1:1 dilution, Perceptol creates a very highly detailed image but with relatively gentle acutance. When used at the higher 1:3 dilution, the solvent effect exhausts, and edge acutance is significantly enhanced, but with it, also grain crispness, and hence the appearance of grain itself. It's a tradeoff, depending on what you want. Pyro is a staining developer, so has that benefit, helping to hold highlight printability. FP4 is a lovely versatile film. You can use almost any common developer with FP4 with decent results.

[Michael Kadillak]

If you define "sharpness" in relation to edge acutance, that can affect your developer decision. I prefer PMK pyro for FP4 sheet film for a combination of traits, in which excellent acutance is just one. A developer which I previously used was Perceptol. When used at the usual 1:1 dilution, Perceptol creates a very highly detailed image but with relatively gentle acutance. When used at the higher 1:3 dilution, the solvent effect exhausts, and edge acutance is significantly enhanced, but with it, also grain crispness, and hence the appearance of grain itself. It's a tradeoff, depending on what you want. Pyro is a staining developer, so has that benefit, helping to hold highlight printability. FP4 is a lovely versatile film. You can use almost any common developer with FP4 with decent results.

Completely agree with pyro and FP4+. Use it on 8x10 negatives all the time. Acquired some FP4+ in 8x20 and tray developed it in pyro and I got a terrible dichroic fog over the negative that surprised me no end. I came to the deductive conclusion that Ilford must have added something unique to the film they cut for the ULF special order that precipitated the reaction I experienced.

[Drew Wiley]

Perhaps some incorporated developer agent, or an excess of it? You should ask them if there's any difference from their usual coating or not. Do you pre-rinse?

[Bernice Loui]

Began using PMK Pyro with FP-4 in the early 1990s shortly after Gordon Hutchings's Book of Pyro was published. Back then Pyro developers were mythical as there was SO many off the shelf developers available at that time. Experiments began with 4x5 FP-4 using a Nikkor tank. This evolved to using PMK pyro in the Jobo and 3006 drum with 5x7 FP-4+ and other films. FP4 (+) & PMK pyro is a good combo.

Suggest getting a copy of Gordon Hutchings's Book of Pyro.


Bernice

[Michael Kadillak]

Perhaps some incorporated developer agent, or an excess of it? You should ask them if there's any difference from their usual coating or not. Do you pre-rinse?

Yes, standard 5 minute water pre rinse. The image I made was not as stimulating as I originally thought and I just made sure I did not go down this road again. Probably should have contacted Ilford about this but suspicions that they would not have a reason why this happened convinced me to just move on. Shortly thereafter I was tray processing a number of 8x10 T Max 400 negatives in pyro and one FP4+ negative slipped into the bunch and it processed beautifully.