Guys, each and every single HP5 shot I scan (from my old shots) is just breath taking. The tonality and grain are out of this world. I'm not sure if Ilford changed their HP5 recipe over time (Kodak has killed its line this way! ) but if they didn't, you're in for a major B&W treat! I don't understand how I forgot Ilford HP5 was so good.
Ray, I swear it's all Tri-X is supposed to be. Here are some, Ray! And I'll post more and more in the forum, as soon as I scan more.
Ned, looks good! I dug around and found the one and only roll of 35mm HP5 I ever shot! Here's one from that roll (two of the kids at the playground) - As soon as I get some developing equipment together, I'll definitely give it a try! :smile:
I shoot the new stuff, HP5+ - I can't compare it compositionally, but the contrast seems to me to be all good; All Canon Canonet QL19 GIII, Ilford HP5+ Ilford Ilfotec LC29 (1+29), 9mins @ 20°c, 4 inversions each minute
Ray, Your image is great great great! John, Yes, the contrast is there. I definitely like HP5 and especially since Ilford is totally commited to B&W (as opposed to Kodak), I think it's just fair to start sponsoring them IMHO.
H-m-m, thanks but looking at the negs, exposure was good but I think I souped the negs a little too long! Salvageable, though!
Some more HP5+ from me; HP5+ in the Canonet QL19 GIII, developed as the previous shots. When you say "It's everything Tri-X should be", Ned, how do you think Tri-X is different in terms of the image? I have the chance of picking up some Tri-X at a very good price, hence the reason for asking.
