Re: HP5+ for alternative processes

From: shannon stoney ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 04/02/04-10:38:03 AM Z
Message-id: <a05210600bc9346249e9f@[]>

>Has anyone used recent HP5+ to make in-camera negatives for
>alternative printing? I just tested this film again for the first
>time in several years and was really startled by how much better is
>than the stuff I previously tested. The B+F is very low and, it has
>good expansion and contraction potential, and will develop to a very
>high CI (over 1.1). And developing times are relatively short. For
>example, for a normal SBR and a DR of 1.70 for palladium printing I
>only needed 7:30 minutes of development time in Pyrocat 2:2:100. At
>this point the CI was .82 and the B+F was a very low .21 based on UV
>Sure be interested in hearing opinions of others who have worked
>recently wit this film.

I love HP5+. I use it alternately with TXP 320. The reason is the
good expansion and contraction potential. I load three holders with
TXP and three with HP5+, when I go out. If it's in the morning, I
shoot the TXP first, when most subject brightness ranges fall in the
6-7 range. Then when the light gets brighter and it turns into an
N-1 day or an N-2 day, I use HP5+. In the afternoon I shoot the HP5+
first and then as it gets less bright, I switch to TXP. TXP doesn't
seem to accomodate really bright SBRs as well.

I still think TXT was probably the best film ever made, but I like
TXP fine so far too. HP5+ runs third. But it is a necessary part of
my arsenal.

My development times are longer than yours, but I use D76 1:1.

Received on Fri Apr 2 10:39:01 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 05/14/04-02:14:30 PM Z CST