Pull processing HP5

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Pathos - 05 Mar 2005 15:29 GMT

Hi Folks,

My N80 recently went on the blink, and so I borrowed an N65 to shoot a
lesson for a class I am taking. I am using bulk loaded HP5 (asa400).
In my haste, I didn't realize that you could not manually set the iso
on the N65, and on nonDX coded films, the iso is defaulted to 100.
Hence, the film is 2 stops overexposed, and I'm thinking it should be
pull processed to iso 400 times, as I have heard that the exposure
lattitude is not as great as other films (TriX, etc.). I have seen
reccomendations for push processing HP5, that suggest for a 2 stop
underexposure, multiply your time by 2.25. Does this factor work the
other way, IE- divide recommended normal development time by 2.25?

Thanks very much,

Dave

Reply to this Message

death skunk five - 05 Mar 2005 16:09 GMT

the latitudes are just as good as TriX, but that isnt the issue.

whos developing the negs, what developer?

> Hi Folks,
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Dave

Reply to this Message

jjs - 05 Mar 2005 16:13 GMT

If the light was contrasty (clear sunny day), then you will probably be fine
with D-76 1:1 with 20% less time.

Reply to this Message

Pathos - 05 Mar 2005 17:02 GMT

Thanks for the replys. Sorry I didn't include all info: I am
developing, using D76, 1:2 at 72degF., which has given me great negs in
the past. The photos were varied from outside in bright sun, to
artificial lignts indoors.

Dave

Reply to this Message

Pathos - 05 Mar 2005 18:59 GMT

As a follow up, I cut the development time by .25 (9.75 min at 72 deg
F) on the roll in question. The negatives are definitely printable,
but out of the photo flo, appear to be thinner and less contrasty that
what I usually get. Normal development, may have been most appropriate
in this situation.

Thanks everyone, for your input.

Best regards,

Dave

Reply to this Message

Craig Schroeder - 05 Mar 2005 16:49 GMT

I find that HP5 is closer to a true 200 in standard developers.... I
think I'd knock off about 20-25% of the time from your normal routine
and I'll bet you'll have very usable negatives.

>Hi Folks,
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>Dave

Craig Schroeder
craig nospam craigschroeder com

-Eschew Obfuscation-

Reply to this Message

Gregory Blank - 06 Mar 2005 12:17 GMT

> Hi Folks,
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Dave

I usually factor my modifications by multiplying the standard time
against .10 per stop desired. In other words by multiplying the time
by .90 to get the final time. Based on what I know about HP5 the most
you want take out of that exposure is one stop. A two stop pull would
be close to a .20 reduction.

Signature

LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Reply to this Message