Fastest film for 8x10 other than TMY

[Peter De Smidt]

Alas, I cannot afford TMY-2 in 8x10. What alternative would give the highest true film speed?

[Mark Sawyer]

I've always been very fond of Ilford's HP5+, but I shoot it at 200.

[sperdynamite]

In 120 people regularly push HP5 as high as 3200 with pretty good results. I'd say this film won't even sneeze at 1600, that would be my go to for speed. Tri-X 320 similarly will push well, though I think the Kodak stuff is a lot over priced these days.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Guys. In multiple tests with various formats, TMY-2 gives me an EI of 500 with N development in DS-10. I've never used much HP5+. I'll pick up a box. Currently I'm shooting FP4+, but in my system it's an EI 50 film, slower than Delta 100. Way back in the early 1990s, I shot Tri-x rated at EI 200. I have a photo in mind where a fast film would be best.

[Mark Sampson]

I worked at Kodak with a brilliant engineer, who in a past life had been the crew chief for an Indianapolis racing team.
Once, in a similar situation, he posed the classic question.
"Speed costs money- how fast do you want to go?"
All kidding aside, a valid question.... really just a matter of how much shadow detail you are willing to sacrifice.

[Jim Noel]

I agree with Mark. if you want to "increase the speed" of any film, YOU MUST SACRIFICE THE SHADOWS!

[Peter De Smidt]

I don’t want to push film. If there’s nothing faster than hp5+, barring tmy-2, then I’ll use the Ilford film.

[Daniel Unkefer]

I've always used HP5 in 8x10 up to the end of the eighties. Interestingly I just unwrapped 8x10 HP5 (not +) that's been in my freezer 25 years. I wonder if my 8x10 holders are loaded?

Acufine will legit add 1/2 stop shadow filmspeed.

[Drew Wiley]

HP5 is OK at 400 in moderate contrast scenes. In higher contrast situations you really need to support the shadows with more exposure; so in such cases, it's at least a stop slower than TMY for all practical purposes. "Pushing" it at even higher rated speeds simply amputates even more zones from the bottom end - counterproductive.

[Corran]

Like Daniel mentioned, you can get a bit more real speed from Acufine. Great developer for that usage. Cheaper than the difference between a box of HP5 and TMY!

[Neal Chaves]

I obtain a true 400 speed from HP5+ when I develop in IlfotechHC 1:31 68* for 7:30 or for 5:00 at 75*.

[Daniel Unkefer]

And you can replenish Acufine. Not everybody knows this. B&H stocks it.

[Drew Wiley]

Nominal speed is only part of the problem. TMY is quite steep near the bottom of the curve; HP5 has a substantial toe. TMY is very fine grained; HP5 has rather large grain. Very different personalities. I love both films but for different reasons.

[Oren Grad]

Is the application you have in mind one for which reciprocity behavior is going to matter?

[Peter De Smidt]

Oren, no. I need to shoot at 1/2 second or faster.

[Oren Grad]

OK. Beyond HP5 Plus, TMY and TXP, I think the other options are Foma 400, Foma Retro 320 and Bergger 400. Afraid I've not tested any of those, but between HP5 Plus and TXP, I'd certainly select HP5 Plus for speed. It's been my primary sheet film for more than 20 years, and I'd be comfortable with it for any assignment.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Oren. I’ve ordered a box.

[angusparker]

Change the developer not the film and get a stop of speed by N development in Xtol.

[Drew Wiley]

I absolutely love the combination of "watercolor grain" and enhanced edge effect I get with HP5 in PMK pyro, at least up to 3X enlargement. A nice 8x10 film, but too mushy for me personally in smaller formats. TMY is way more versatile in that respect. TXP has more of a shotgun grain - not my cup of tea, and I've never been impressed with Foma 400 or its overoptimistic speed rating.

[koraks]

I've never been impressed with Foma 400 or its overoptimistic speed rating.
I quite like it in 4x5, but doesn't get anywhere near 400. Maybe 250-320 in XTOL/mytol. But I find it performs best at 200 or even a little less. So it's not a high speed film in my book. I think of the options mentioned only TMY2 will actually reach 400.

[Bruce Watson]

TMY-2 gives me an EI of 500 with N development in DS-10.

I get an EI of 500 with TMY-2 also, in XTOL. Just sayin'.

About the best you can do in 10x8 is going to be HP5+, but HP5+ shoulders off where TMY-2 keeps going, and HP5+ is going to go into reciprocity failure in the shadows far sooner than TMY-2. Enough to make it difficult to control shadow detail in a lot of situations. This can be a moot point, until it isn't. I had many frustrating shooting sessions trying to figure out how to control this until I finally tried TMY-2. It's expensive stuff, but how expensive is missing a shot because your film crapped out on you?

Really, I did the math on what I was doing and figured that the cost of film (any film) was meaningless compared to the costs of travel (airline tix, hotel, meals away from my own kitchen, car rentals, etc.).

So maybe you need two films. One to use locally when you can go back and take a shot again if the film lets you down. But for those longer distance photo trips where coming back isn't happening, use TMY-2. Just a thought.

Personally I just use TMY-2 for everything. But it's somewhat easier to do that in 5x4. Oh well.

[Drew Wiley]

The now extinct Bergger 200 was an impressive 8x10 film; but at least they realistically marketed it at 200. Foma not so. And I agree with Bruce. One sheet of reliable, versatile TMY can be cheaper than wasting shots with lesser films.

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Bruce. I agree with everything you say. The proposed photo in question is local.

[HoodedOne]

Polaroid 8x10 is rated at 640 asa. But I have shot it at e.i. 1000. Polaroid film is getting a little more sensitive with age :)
Only downside is that you’ll need special equipment to develop the film, and it’s expensive.

[Dugan]

Is "hyper"-ing (like astrophotographers do) an option?