Ilford FP4+ Developer Inquiry

[Salmo22]

I'm returning to LF after a hiatus of many years. Previously, I shot Fuji Velvia 50 exclusively and had the sheets developed at the lab. Now I intend to shoot PF4+ and develop myself at home. I'm tempted to use Ilford's DDX, but wanted to get some input before buying my chemicals.

Accordingly, what is your favorite developer for FP4+?

Thanks in advance.

[Tin Can]

Rodinol

[angusparker]

My take on my favorite three developers: https://www.angusparkerphoto.com/blo...ite-developers

[Two23]

I've been using hc110 with great success. Easy to use and consistent results. I have the Stearman sp445 tank which is very easy and hard to screw up.

Kent in SD

[Michael Kadillak]

Go with your instincts and use DDX. I acquired a bottle of it recently and was very impressed with the results and in concentrate it is quick and easy to use. Its only downside is it is not cheap. FP4+ is enormously accommodating to a host of developers and everyone has their favorite and there is no right or wrong answer. Glad you are getting back in the game. I am also a fan of Ilford multi grade printing papers as well which are designed to respond more favorably to a lower net film density than you may remember.

[Leigh]

Rodinal.

- Leigh

[Vaughn]

The decision will also hinge on your planned use of the negatives; silver printing, alt printing, contact printing, scanning, or so on.

I print in platinum and in carbon, so my contrast needs are quite different than silver printing, which can be different if you will be only scanning the negatives.

[rdeloe]

HC-110 is a good general purpose developer and very convenient to use. It's also cheap.

I'm currently using Xtol and like it a lot. It's more expensive than HC-110, and less convenient to use than HC-110 (only in the sense that you have to mix it up from powder). Once you have the stock solution divided up into convenient containers it's easy enough. I mix up a batch and store it in 250ml mason jars. I use the Stearman SP-445, so one 250ml jar of stock plus 250ml of distilled water gives me the working solution to fill that tank. I chose Xtol because I shoot primarily TMAX 400. Were I shooting FP4+ or HP5+ I could be happy with HC-110. (By the way, if you're shooting sheet film, I would give HP5+ a good hard look; in side-by-side comparisons of FP4+ and HP5+ I didn't see a marked advantage on any dimension from FP4+ -- and the speed bump of HP5+ is well worth it to me.)

Regarding contrast, how you develop may have as much to do with the result as what developer you use. I just compared four scenes, each shot on TMax 400 with two negatives (same basic overall exposure). I developed the first shot for each scene in Xtol 8 minutes 45 seconds, four agitations every minute. I did the second one for each scene with same developer, same time, but four agitations every 30 seconds. That's a significant increase in agitation, and it produced a very noticeable increase in contrast.

My two cents: just pick one that's available and convenient, and stick with it until you understand it well. Based on sheer convenience and cost alone, HC-110 would be a good choice.

[jp]

Practically no other developer than pyrocat hd and it's variants... I use and like pyrocat hdc since it works the same as hd and has one less ingredient to source.

If I couldn't do that, probably D76 which can also be versatile.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Pyrocat-HD.
Xtol 1+1.