Why is everyone OBSESSED with HP5? ... a film stock review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 июл 2024
- With so many possible film options available for black and white, HP5 somehow holds the title of the most popular film stocks made today. I have no stats but it seems like it's probably the best selling film of all. Ilford has definitely done something right here, to capture the hearts and minds of so many film photographers. For both 35mm and medium format, this film seems to always see a great choice. But why?
0:00 Intro
0:59 Out taking Pics
2:48 Versatility
3:44 How does it perform
5:06 Grain
6:24 Sharpness
7:35 Price
8:09 Darkroom Prints
Check out my film photography podcast!
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/3kBOuas...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Web link: www.buzzsprout.com/1567152
Check me out in Instagram:
Main: / ribsy__
New Classic Podcast: / newclassicfilm 
Хобби
That portrait format picture of Westminster is absolutely gorgeous! Well done!
thanks! i think it came out nicely 😊
You should try Hp5 in medium or large format, I think that’s where it really shines. Hp5 seems to have more subtle tones which suits the larger negatives and not to mention it’s one of the cheaper films but still professional quality!
yea its a good price! especially given how well it performs
Beautiful!! Love that Westminster print. HP5 is a favorite. What made me really fall in love with it was the first time I tried a #4 filter in the darkroom - it completely transformed the image it into something that I just couldn't get with a scan, NL Pro, or photoshop. I do think there is a certain "bloom" to the film that a lot of others don't have which gives it a classic look that's very present in your Westminster frame. I use the zone system and I find a lot of my favorites are ones where I'm overexposing and using an N-1 or N-2 development - it really makes the highlights glow and when printed with a high number filter in the darkroom gives a truly unique look.
yea! i don't have a dedicated BW enlarger so i am messing with contrast using the color wheels
Great video. I use HP5 also. Ive been digging your channel man!
thanks for watching! appreciate the support 😊
Thanks! Subscribing!! I've been wanting to like HP5+ but each time I try it, I get lots of big choppy blobby grains and it doesn't do as well as Tri-X would have. I think it's in part my developing though (I'm sloppy and lazy, so I mostly use Diafine, which is more well matched to Tri-X shot at 800 to 1000). As I understand it, I think the trade-off for Delta 400 being sharper than HP5+ is that Delta 400 doesn't have as much exposure latitude, and Delta 400 doesn't give the same wide smooth gradients of tones as you would have with HP5+. And I read somewhere that it uses up your fixer faster, too?
haha fair enough. i def don't mind the hp5 grain
Currently working through a brick of Hp5, learned on it and to this day 17 years later It’s still my Favorite bw, pushing it out over exposing it and still getting a great image. Very versatile 🤘🏽🎞✨
nice! i love film bricks haha. def gonna push/pull a bit
I love that you are more use to printing color film more than BW film. So different than the majority out there. Inspiring
hey! yea - its good to change it up. def gonna be shooting tons more BW this year. im really enjoying it
Great review, looking forward to you trying the c41 process film. Do you add those black borders in post or does you lab scan it that way?
those borders are directly form my scan (i scan myself). i just crop in a way to show the border
I think you nailed it with your first point...versatility..
yup! say no more 😊
I have been shooting Delta 100 for the last few shoots. Thanks to you, I am going to give Hp5 a shot. Thanks for this video, Ribsy!
let's see how you like it!
You mentioned that Delta 400 is the other 400 speed film by Ilford. There's also another one, though: Ilford XP2. Requires C-41 processing
yea i am ware! haven't tried it tho
Good video Ribsy! Love HP5 👍
Thanks for watching
Like your channel, subscribed !
thanks! welcome 😊
I like it as an all-round film, especially since I can buy it as 30.5m rolls for bulk loading, and also for pushing to 800 or 1600. But recently I've switched to Rollei Retro 400S for that speed and Adox for the lower speed/sharper films.
yea bulked loaded is def the way to go. will have to try the 400s
Other than the ability to push and pull like crazy, HP5 doesn’t have one quality that’s my absolute favorite. But it’s good at basically everything, is the duct tape of film. For a little more grain, I really love Bergger Pancro, but never liked it above box speed. HP5 might not always be the best film to load up, but it’s almost never the wrong one. Great video as always!
great way to put it! the duct tape of film 😊
Good job man
thanks man! 😊
I love HP5 and Kentmere 400. They both give you that classic 400 speed black and white look that is often associated with Tri X from Kodak but for a fraction of the price. Here in Canada Kodak is 20 dollars a roll where HP5 is half that and Kentmere is even less at like 7 dollars a roll. It is a good way to get that classic look and not go broke. It is crazy that two British film stocks that are imported from the UK are way cheaper then American film here.
haha thats so weird. you'd think the UK one would be more expensive!
Great video. Do you have a preference for this over the Delta 400?
delta is preferred for studio work. hp5 for street
I felt when you were showing the images that the skies and highlights were overexposed, and the strength of this film is the subtleness of gradation at ISO 400. But of course it provides a lot of latitude pushing it, both in low light and when pursuing an artistic effect. I concur with Shawn Pray’s comments below that larger negatives might be better, also for definition. Nevertheless, you got a nice, dreamy look.
Yea def overexposed a bit
Great video!
I have my hp5 days and my delta 400 days, can't say which one is better.
haha i like it! nice to vary things a bit
HP5 ALL DAY BABY, the best B&W film ever, the sweet spot is pushing to 1600 (no 800 or 3200) 1600 is the perfect spot for hp5
haha thats very specific! i will def try that. sounds like a good spot
I totally agree, though it sometimes gets very contrasty
Honestly, I have a hard time choosing between 1600 and 3200. I like to push it to 3200 a lot. But I get your point. 😎
@@horatiueduard i understand, but after a couple of rolls i find 1600 the sweet spot
Pushing or underexposing?
HP5 is a great all rounder, it deals with a lot of different lighting situations, both natural and artificial and can be pushed and pulled a couple of stops without any problems. I generally develop mine in HC-110 B but I have developed it in Rodinal and Ilfosol 3 with decent results. It's definitely a film you can experiment and learn with.
for sure! i need to mess around with other developers
I like Parliament at 1.11/4.11......never seen it shot like that. Exposure worked out ! Very cool
thanks! 😊
Hp5 is a great all-round film for me!
I will happily push it to 1600!
A thing I noticed:
You seem to distort your audio levels, have you noticed that during editing of the video?
Have a good Sunday!
thanks for the note. yea i noticed, not sure what was wrong this time. doesn't happen often 😅
It sounds like clipping maybe? Can try turning the gain down on the mic and compensate in post
For the longest time, I was not a fan of HP5+ in 35mm, but I set about shooting five rolls in an effort to love HP5+ and it worked. Personally, I love HP5+ in 4x5 shot at ASA-200 and processed in Pyrocat-HD. Although my goto 400-speed film in 35mm remains Kodak Tri-X.
i see what you mean. i've heard great things about hp5 in larger formats
I primarily use HP-5+. My reasons, which certainly won't apply to everyone:
1. I prefer it's even tonal range and ability to reach a dark shadow without loosing all detail. My comparison was Tri-X.
2. I shoot mainly medium format, where the gain or sharpness difference compared to a T-grain film like Delta 400 or T-Max 400 isn't really significant.
3. I think Ilford is more reliably committed to continuing film production compared to Kodak or Fuji. I like to know its going to be around.
4. Like most other Ilford films, the 35mm film is available in bulk rolls, which present a significant cost savings, unlike Kodak or Fuji.
5. I spent a lot of time and effort fine tuning my preferred developer. I then calibrated HP-5 and FP4 for development therein, as well as push and push processing. Big hassle to redo that work for a new film. (Maybe for the new Acros II, if it isn't cancelled again.)
6. It's the devil I know.
great reasons! you are def invested in hp5 😊
(the devil haha 😂)
One of my Fav films Ribs. Glad you're enjoying BW!
yea mate! i know you love hp5 😊 trying my best at this BW thing
I've tried many others, but HP5+ and FP4+ are the two films I always go back to.
make sense! they are tried and tested
No sir, that shot at 2:00 is not ruined! It was amazing!
haha thanks! i will always be dissapointed
yep! The epitome of Henri Cartier Bresson's "decisive moment".
Can't go wrong with HP5+!
- it's available!! (in bulk roll too!)
- It's predictable, and they don't change the recipe each year;
- It's versatile, can be pulled or pushed well;
- Very hard to mess up exposure or development;
- Very easy to adjust to taste in development process with different chemistry;
- Excellent value for money, especially bulk rolled;
I like it at 800 with a yellow or orange filter, developed with DD-X or HC.
yea hp5 is great. good value
Good vid! How did you print a 35mm pic on an 8x10 paper? I tried to do that with a 2 blade easel but I can never get it centred with equal white borders like you did. The only way I can do that is by cropping, which I try to avoid.
you either have to crop (like i do) or you print it in full but the image will be smaller and the borders might not be perfect
I do love HP5 but looking back on my college stuff we used Kodak Tri- X as well so need to do my own tests! Enjoyed this Ribsy
Tri-x has been changed many times, most recently in 2007. It has much less grain and lower dynamic range.
ah good to know! i had no clue 😅
ahh tri-x. that's on my list! def gonna give that a serious look too
@@joeltunnah I used it in the 90s😒
It’s just typical, beautiful golden hour light and b&w film in the camera! How do you find doing darkroom prints as opposed to inkjet prints?
yes! its great. i've never done inkjet prints. for me darkroom fun is all about the process
I have been using quite a bit of it in 120 recently on a project. Developing in HC110 dilution B. HP5 has always delivered medium contrast negs for me. At around 400 ISO it handles broad subject brightness ranges well. Low contrast scenes or flat light might need a high grade in the darkroom. What are people's favourite developers for HP5? For increased contrast, for sharpness, for tonality?
yea i think i agree. alot of this film feels "medium" to me. i can be pulled in an direction
Just bought some rolls myself. Can't wait to run them through my F100!
dope! happy shooting 😊
HP5 was my go-to when I was studying photography in London. Richmond Park and the surrounding area was a good place to learn.
yea def!
You hoooooked bud :-) Have fun :-)
haha yea. a bit hooked on BW!
HP5 in 120 is easier to load on a real and stays flat on the scanner better than any other film I’ve used. Great stock! Love the over exposed pics that worked out really well.
yea not bad!
Love this film. I rarely use it at its box speed. Usually I'm pushing it to 1600 or 3200.
yea good call. thats my plan for the future as well
You might like Fuji Neopan if you can find it in the UK. Btw if you like old movies, check out Godard's "Alphaville" which gives HP4 a top line billing with the actors 🤓
yea ive used neopan. and i do like it. noted on alphaville - will see what thats all about
I recently shot it at 800 in medium format in the snow and the results were better than I expected.
great! i'd love to see
@@ribsy I think I recently posted them on my Instagram (jose_and99) no post-ed, just the raw scans. They should be the last two posts.
It’s an excellent emulsion. It’s definitely been changed or tweaked over the last 3 decades. But dependable.
I don’t ‘pull’ or ‘push’ films necessarily. My ‘normal’ EI for HP5 depends on the developer used. 200-320 Rodinal 1+50, 400-500 D76 1+1, 640-800 DDX
Best
interesting. yea, i didn't even mention the difference in developers but that is a major factor. thanks for the shout
As well as differences in format. 135, 120 & 4x5 in Rodinal, then enlarged/printed to 11x14 offer different characteristics. Whether that is positive or negative, is up to you.
The EIs I mentioned come from calibrating my process over the years, sensitometry, etc. Certainly not required, but offers some predictable consistency.
Hope all is well in your part of the world.
Keep in mind true speed of this film is 200-250, not 400. Exposure for 100-200 , and printed in a darkroom enlarger is easily manageable. Check out Henry Wessel, who shot Tri x at 100.
If you need more contrast, use a harder paper or filters and rc paper.
I see a trend with film, that everyone seems to try to get a final image in the negative. Especially when folks scan and just throw their images up on social media. Whereas in the past, we all tried to get the best template possible on the negative, to give more options in the darkroom when printing.
I’d also be aware that the massive dev chart uses some pretty awkward times, if you keep referencing the film developers cookbook, the times are much more accurate.
fair enough! its def a very manageable film in the darkroom. has a nice vintage touch to it
For B&W portraits Pancro 400 is my favorite...something in the way it renders skin is unique and pleasing...always have a fridge full of the stuff
i have some pancro in the fridge. need to give it a go
@@ribsy if doing portraits...try it @200
HP5 is my favourite bw film stock. Perfect for portraits and landscapes.
yea i believe it! its really good 🤟🏽
Never been a B&W guy but damn now I gotta try 🙏🏿
oh man you def gotta try. you are missing out! your wallet will thank you too 😅
Same, I hated B&W photography until I took photography serious. But I love the equality monochrome color brings. All things under the sun are in tune, like Pink Floyd said
Hi! What is better for this film in order to keep details: Metering in shadows or higlights?
meter for shadows if you want as much details as possible
@@ribsy thanks for replying :).
I love HP5 shot at box speed developed in Rodinal :) My go to combination for most days :).
nice! i still haven't messed with rodinal
@@ribsy you should try if in combination with hp5 :) I kind of like the way contrast looks at the end.
@@JeremyGreysmark 1:25 or 1:50 I'm getting ready to try Rodinol for the forst time myself ?
I used to shoot HP5 religiously...i liked the contrast and that you could push it two stops and get good results still. In more recent years though, I’ve switched to shooting (almost exclusively) Kodak Tmax. HP5 is still a great film though, and a good price compared to everyone else at this point!
yea the price is good! a nice package
Tri-X and HP5 are both good but the flatness of the film after developing makes it my favorite.
yea! i need to try tri-x 😊
I'm more of a Tri-X guy, but I do like how hp5 looks in medium format.
another tri-x! i need to try it 😊
Another Tri-X fan here. Love how punchy and contrast-y it is.
I’m not a huge fan of the HP5 but I’ve only shot 3 rolls of it or so. I prefer the contrast of Tri-X with diafine.
Love HP5, and know exactly what i'll get from it. I've been looking at other B&W 400 films, and loving Kosmo Foto 100 pushed to 400, lots of character, and FOMAPAN 400. I guess it all depends what you want as the end result. Oh and Agfa APX 400 as well.
hey! yea i'm looking forward to experimenting with some other films as well
Hate to break it to you but all of those are either fomapan or fomapan with a different label now...
@moofy that is actually really good to know, I didn't realise, I knew Kosmo was repackaged, but not the others. Do you have a list or source with what b&w film is what?
I have tried HP5 in 35mm and 120. Shot about 40 rolls and developed in HC110, Xtol, FX-39II and Rodinal. I have concluded that I prefer Tri-x 400. Personal Choice.
yea interesting. ill be trying tri-x soon!
HP5 is definitely my 'go to'. When you bulk load it is cheap as chips. Way better shadow detail than Tri-X which I personally find a bit hit and miss and muddy at times. I find Delta 400 Looks great if you do large prints using 35mm film. The grain is very subtle but not over powering. Great for architecture.
bulk loading is the key! and yea, delta 400 sharpness is attractive
To grainy for me. When I was taking film class in community college, everyone was buying hp5. I thought the photos came out to grainy but the details where there. Personally I think delta 100 is a much better film and way sharper. Love the contrast on delta 100
HP5 is a pretty fine grained film. Of course Delta 400 is going to be finer grained and Delta 100 even more so.
It depends on the developer you use quite a bit with HP5.
@@GregoryVeizades grain size/amount is inherent to the film, it actually has nothing to do with the developer. However a solvent developer like D76 will actually eat away at the silver making the grains smaller and less obvious. It also redeposits the silver elsewhere in your photo, causing a loss of acutance and tonality.
A non-solvent developer like rodinal will leave the grains full size, so it looks “grainier”, but you get a sharper image and better transition between tones.
yea this film def will be a bit grainy. but it seems to be more controlled than other "grainy" films. i dig it 😁
yea for sure! delta is the much finer option. to each their own!
Ever shot Ilford Fp4?
I'm obsessed by HP5 for 4 years now. It has better shadows details than Tri-X and it's way cheaper! This film is bullet proof! 👌
yea! its pretty hard to make an argument against it 😊
It depends on the film format. in 6x4.5cm for up to 16x20 inch enlargements, I like the interior tonality of HP5+ (in D-23) better than the current Kodak Tri-X coating. In 35mm, it's a toss-up between Delta 100 and 400, but I usually go with the slowest speed film possible. I'll use 3 rolls of Pan F or Rollei 25 to one roll of HP5+. I'm a sharpness fanatic, 21 lb. Manfrotto tripod and all. Like the late Ansel Adams, I only use a tripod because it's so hard to attach a tripod head to a 20 ton boulder or building or street quickly. About 35 years ago, Eastman Kodak coated a "secret object" (special order) B&W extended red sensitivity emulsion in 4x5 sheets with an ISO of 12. Absolutely no grain and beautiful tonality at about $2.50 a sheet. I could have bankrupted myself shooting it and printing 30x40 baryta prints.
really interesting about that top secret project haha. ill have to look it up
Pan-F is an awesome film, I use it for 120 fairly often but I really wish they made it in large format sheets I would shoot that all the time if they did. I could probably custom order it from Ilford when they do they once a year custom run but I haven't looked into it.
Kodak Tri-X is my go-to. HP5 is ok but it doesn't pack the punch that Tri-X has. Although I do like the way HP5 looks when pushed to 1600.
yea i'm looking forward to testing tri-x!
may have something to do availability and relative cost.
haha yes. i really think thats it 😊
HP5's latitude has always been stupid good though. Ultra forgiving. I'm not sure that it is my all-time favourite BW film but I certainly like it
yea that latitude is great. it can really handle most lighting conditions
HP5 used to be my main film till I moved over to FP4. I was finding that the grain was just too aggressive for my taste. However, HP5 developed in Perceptol is a game changer in that regard. In 35mm Perceptol really tames the grain and delivers lots of tone, too.
Gotcha - interesting
People who say that Delta or Tmax look “clinical” or even digital, have only seen them developed in D76 or something similar. Try Rodinal.
To me there’s no comparison, when developed in Rodinal I’ll take Delta 400 or Tmax 400 over HP5 any day. Better sharpness, better looking grain, and better tonality.
I love Delta. Especially Delta 100. I will have to try it in Rodinal. Thanks!
yea i have never developed with rodinal. will have to give that a try
I like Adox FX-39 II for T-grain, the negs are just beautiful.
I haven’t used it much, but i thought it too contrasty. I really like delta 400.
fair point! i like the contrast tho 😊
I like HP5 though Tri-X is also very good with similar characteristics. I really like it in medium format where there is less grain but you still have the exposure latitude.
HP5 has more highlight density. They both have a long shadow toe.
@@norayr then that’s a scanning issue. Or you can use a speed reducing developer like Rodinal to preserve highlight detail.
yea i need to invest in a few rolls of tri-x. seems like a crowd favorite
HP-5 is less sharp than FP-4, but HP-5 has greater acutance or perceived sharpness, especially if shot at it's true speed, which could be 200 for many cameras and their exposure meters.
yea its a great all around performer
Hi when I use Ilford HP5 I use a yellow filter then you really get the magic. I do use a light yellow filter I can highly recommend it 😎😎😎✌️✌️
yea! i keep hearing about the yellow filter. def need to try it
@@ribsy True but I would like to say I mostly use it. when I use HP5
Now that I scan my negatives, I find my HP5 negatives easier to get good scans of than my Tri-X negatives because of the lower contrast. It's easier to digitally add more contrast to a lower contrast scan, than to try to fix a scan that has too much contrast. If I lived in London like you I might still prefer Tri-X, but in the California sun HP5 is easier for me to work with.
Makes sense! Thanks for watching
But you can decrease the contrast of a film with a shorter development time, or higher dilution...
I prefer Tri-X .. by a lot. Sharper, less grain, but nice tones as well.. but HP5 is cheaper and I'm not working much thanks to the pandemic, so that's what I've been buying. HP5 definitely has a nice kinda "dreamy" look to it which is kinda nice.
i'm excited to give tri-x a go. haven't messed with it too much yet
I can only guess why it's so popular.
Folks who spent a lot of time shooting digital are accustomed to the options presented such as faster shutter speeds, larger apertures and variable ISO- which can get fairly ridiculously high. When those same people shoot film they just figure they need the fastest film they can get -often without doing the math - so they shoot the HP5 and they shoot Portra 400/800.
I've shot Acros 100 , rated it 84 , ever since Agfapan 100 was discontinued - so two films spanning decades- and while I'm a big fan of Ilford rapid fix I have no use for their film or paper. y process is to generate a consistent IQ, finest grain and broadest tonal range from 67 originals with film, chemistry and the kit all absolute constants. Complete replicability. Only the content changes and all technical variables are pre exposure.
yea its a very convenient option. helps give everyone options for shooting
I think it's pretty simple why it's popular, it's cheap, widely available, and 400 speed so it's versatile. Oh and it works great. I use Ilford films pretty much exclusively for my black and white 120 and 4x5 work because the prices are a lot less than Kodak and the performance is just as good. With HP5+ you can get different degrees of sharpness and grain depending on which developer and dilution you use to develop it. "character" is subjective to how it is developed basically. Personally my favorite developers for HP5+ are HC110 and ID-11 (or D-76). Xtol isn't bad either and sometimes I'll just develop in Xtol since I like Xtol the best for Delta films (and I have to make 5 liters at a time).
Makes sense!
Hp5 is extremely versatile depending on what you do with it and how you develop it you can make it grainy you can make not grainy you can make it contrasty you can make it not contrasty you get the point the colour rendering is also almost the same as tri-x so you can really make it look like a classic street photo and it's cheaper definitely in bulk
agreed! versatility i think is why so many people like it!
in 2022 Kodak jacked the price to U$18 for 2 (one) roll of 120 tx400... NOW IM OBSESSED WITH ILFORD HP5+.
Ouch!
Hp5 is nice but those 11s u got are CLEAN
hahaha good eye! they aren't actually clean at all, those are my 'beat them up" shoes 😊
I could never get on with HP5, always found it to grainy for me, especially on the shadows. Another Ilford film I have shot a lot is Kentmere 400, spent a year shooting it and other than FP4 it's my go to fast-ish film and can also be pushed.
yea! i haven't messed with kentmere yet. but i want to give it a try
Weird, I found Kentmere more grainy than HP5. I like both though, they're easier and more forgiving to scan compared to Tri-X in my experience.
FP4 in Rodinal for summer HP5 in Ilfotec DDX for winter :)
awesome. interesting - i never considered doing anything differently for the seasons
@@ribsy purely because of the ISO. FP4 is my favourite film but 125 isnt that great this time of year. Its really nice pushed to 200 or 250 in Rodinal too. HP5 is just a bit too flat and grainy for me to be used all the time. RPX 25 is another favourite of mine but the ISO is so low it cant be used that easy.
HP5 also performs well when developed with caffenol
ahh yes. i def want to try that. ive been on a caffenol kick!
Newcomer to the block. Tri X is king.
haha ok. ill let you know what i find
There was a time when llford made some crappy film stock so people stuck with and gravitated towards TMax. I still use Tmax and occasionally I might use llford because it's cheap.
I like ilford 😀
You're the best resource on all things film on the whole web (maybe with "film stock review" website) . Kind of a film scientist. I can't believe you don't have more subscribers. Maybe you should start shooting sexy girls (or baby cats), it's an ingredient you can throw in any RUclips channel to get more views.
Haha thanks for the support
I haven't shot any black & white film yet, but I do have plenty of rolls in stock (how that happened is a long story) - am getting things together so that I can develop myself as B&W development in the lab is extra expensive around here.
I like Fomapan and Agfa APX 400 for the price. I'm also looking forward to shooting Foma Retropan soft 320 - not ISO 400, but close enough. I think you have to include Kodak TMAX 400 and TRI-X 400 in any list of B&W ISO 400 film.
Madison Beach tested Lomography Grey Lady a while ago and liked the result, so that deserves a mention too.
If you haven't watched Andrew & Denae's buyer's guide to B&W ISO 400 film from 2017, that might be inspirational (if you have an hour to kill) ruclips.net/video/zG02lCyAuqg/видео.html
That being said, I shoot a lot of daylight photography on old slow cameras, and I have found ISO 200 color negative film gives me better results in general than ISO 400, but that's down to me and how I shoot.
thanks for the suggestions. yea i def have a few other 400 films to test! gonna be a good year 😊
I usually buy 10 packs of HP5 but just had some great results with Kodax TMAX 400. I'm told it's tricky to print but the results are beautiful,
no issue with either in printing. they both look nice but tmax is so nice and clean
Honestly. HP5 isn't my favorite, but I do like the grain it produces. I get why people love it. But I love contrast. HP Ortho is nice, a lot of people don't really like it from what I've heard.
yea i really like the grain! its a nice amount and look 😊
Hp5 can handle like 6 stops of over exposure so I’m surprised to see highlight detail is lost.
interesting. i guess it depends how intense the light is. i doubt direct sunlight with overexposure is good for any BW film
Everybody talks about HP5 as it is one of the few remaining bw films produced industrially. (Opposed to the manufacturial produced one.) It makes less sense to talk about the defunct films, but when those were around (Agfa, Kodak, even Fuji, or OrWo (partially still around), Forte), photographers in most part of the world not even know about Ilford.
yea makes sense
I like HP5 but not in 35mm only in 120 format. Just something about it in 35mm for me I don't like.
yea ive heard there is a difference in appearance. the larger size prob makes images appear cleaner
HP5+ is just crazy good. It’s so flexible. But Tri-X just looks better. One film I’m staring to experiment more with is Eastman Double-X.
yea hp5 is a classic. cant go wrong
I shoot hp5 a lot. I rate from 200-3200. I either develop in id11 1+2 up until 800 and microphen for 1600-3200. It’s a great stock. It has less contrast than Tri-x and is very noticeable when printing. Hp5 is a easy film to print as its on the flat side.
Funny I’ve actually never tried delta 100. I LOVE FP4 rated at 80 and developed in ID11 1+2😍😍😍😍
yea! its a great product. really gives you lots of options in the darkroom
@@ribsy most definitely. Hope you blessed bro ✊🏾
Na.... tr x for me ... but don’t shot b&w ... not for years .. good channel by the way .will sub ..
haha all good. welcome aboard
I would say it's pretty cheap, less than £6 per 36 exposure roll is pretty good value to me!
yea def great value! its all relative
HP5 is one of the best films I have used. I have used it for over 35 years.
yea hp5 is fun. i do enjoy it
It's funny, but no matter how hard I try to like it, HP5 Plus for me just isn't quite right. I never liked the original HP5 back in the 90's either! It blows out the highlights and lacks shadow detail. I just prefer Kodak's Tri-X I guess. I'm going to try Delta 400 soon, I hope I like that better.
Haha to each their own
I usually shoot with slower film, so my favorites from Ilford have been the FP4 125 and SFX 200
haven't tried any of those. will do soon
I shoot and like HP5+ but I mainly use it for the price. If I could get T-Max and Tri-x for $6 a roll instead of $10-$14 I probably would NOT shoot Illford.
yea the price is key
Are they? I think Delta and Fomapan are smoother and nicer. HP5 looks like old school, grainy Tri X. Ok if you like that, but I don't.
I’m down for some grain
Thanks! Because of the lockdown, I found the time to discover I have been doing many things because EVERYBODY knows that....
I grew up in an era that grain was the enemy. So I only dared to use HP5 in 120. I'll now try 135, developed in Ilfotec DD-X for fine grain. 😇. Don't be too much of a dare-devil.
can't imagine people hating grain - i love it 😊
@@ribsy That’s what people felt at the time. Even Portra 400 still advertises « finest grain ». Just as « Bokeh » is the thing now. We referred to this as more, or less, depth of field . But I’m beginning to move in your direction for B&W. Looking forward to your next video.
I dislike HP5 4 out of 5 times when I shoot it, and I know it's not me, as I dislike the way it comes across in your vid as well. XD I guess its character just doesn't sit well with me. This is all 35mm format though, I've never tried it in medium format...
i need to shoot it more. am intrigued
HP5, HP5 just delivers, you can push and pull it like taffy, it dries flat for easy scanning, something that doesn't happen with Kodak Tri-X for those of us in the Great Lakes Region and while fine grained, it has character that Delta and Tmax films don't have.
For sure! Can’t front on hp5
Across 100, X2, and Delta 3200 for me
HP5 is cool for "pretty" pictures but it's just way too clean of a stock for me
haha i feel you. i like things a bit more messy
Answer to your question, not everyone is obsessed with HP5.
haha fair enough! thanks
@Aaron NoneYa You are right in what you say, HP5 is very well regarded, I use it and like
it a lot, but I’m not OBSESSED by it.
Hp5 is just trix with more push/pull latitude.
that's a pretty big deal! then i guess it isn't like tri-x 😂