Ilford FP4 in Rodinal, Zeiss Ikonta-M 524/16.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Had to fix the contrast on these but no other PP. Not liking FP4 at all, glad I only bought 4 rolls. Grain and sharpness is fine but where's the blacks?

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

Katastrofo · Expire: 2013-11-19

Was this 1:100 for 24 mins like the others? I'm doing the same, shooting rolls of film I don't much like, just to clear it
out of my refrigerator. Really like the blacks/contrast of this using TriX at box speed, Clayton F76 Plus 1:9, don't see anyone
here using this dev:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7168/6640061537_2c0e1eea9d_b.jpg

Seriously thinking about trying it, Arista Premium 400 is TriX, and so cheap from Freestyle.

Back to your set: Pretty impressive shadow detail in #2, view down the alleyway.

marty · Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 767 Location: Italy

Hi, there. Quite problematic film, ain't it? I've tried it in several developers and haven't quite found a combination that works for me. Your negs here look a bit underdeveloped. The problem is that giving more development leads soon to "bulletproof" highlights and "blocked" shadows. This poses a problem to me since I like to print in the traditional way, but if your not doing that it might be different. Having found a few leftover rolls I decided to make some more test and so far the more promising is a home brew two solution developer, this way I should be able to give more development without the aforementioned issue. Why not just giving up you may ask, the answer is that among average shots on this film there are a few which have a tonal range I like, in other words I see a potential awaiting to be unchained Smile

.

Cheers.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Bill, this was 1:50 for 18mins, which is the recipe on the back of the bottle.

Hiya Marty. The negs were nice and dense, I doubt I could have pushed the development much further, as you say. I wonder if a different developer would give better results. I am almost out of RO9 so I will dev the nest roll in Paterson FX-39. I have an Agfa Isolette III for a few days that belongs to a friend, I will try it today with a roll of FP4 and post results later.

I looked at other people's fp4 results, much better than mine, clearly fp4 in ro9 is not good combo, I expect it is much better to use ilford dev like ID-11, Microphen or Ilfosol.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Ilford FP4 is not a film for Rodinal developer. You need a developer for very fine grain results.
Try FP4 with any of these:

- Ilford ID-11
- Kodak T-Max
- Ornano Gradual ST 20
- Ornano Nucleol BF 200

berraneck · Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:38 pm Post subject:

people are always surprised when "the film" doesn´t meet their expectations. that is simply wrong, because there are hundreds ways to develop it with hundreds possible results. that is the great thing with BW film, you can make your own look - if something doesn´t work for you, you change process or chemicals and can get results you need. but you need experience, time and patience... it took me 3years of searching for film/negative developer/process/paper/positive developer(process to find what I wanted... so good luck, sir:)

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Thanks for tips guys, I have another roll of fp4 to develop, I will try it in Paterson FX-39.

Excalibur · Expire: 2014-04-21

Ah FP4 was always my favourite film, and a great combo was with a dev called Unitol, and even by 1961, Johnsons had filled their millionth bottle http://www.photomemorabilia.co.uk/Johnsons_of_Hendon/JoH_Chemicals.html all in the past oh well..... ID II or D76 was my second choice.

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

FP4 is my favourite too. This was developed in Ilfotec DD-X