Shooting HP5 at iso 1600 how to

[Creagerj]

I guess that HP5 can be shot a iso 1600, what is the best way to do this? Should I set my camera to meter like I am shooting iso 1600 and then have it developed as iso 1600 film, or should I shoot at 400 and have it pushed to 1600?

Also, what kind of results does HP5 give at 1600? Does anyone have any examples?

[Henrik]

You should set the meter to iso 1600. At this site you can find the right developing time/temperature for different developers: http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html

Here's a bunch of samples - http://flickr.com/search/?q=hp5%201600&w=all

first post !

[ChrisN]

I've shot it at 800 and then given it longer development, according to the tables in the spec sheet at the Ilford web site. Ilford say it can be pushed to 3200 with 20minutes dev in DD-X.

Effect is to produce more grain - not too bad at 800 (see attached - 384kb file). I'm looking forward to trying some at 1600 and 3200.

[boarini2003]

You can shoot it at any speed you like, just remember that developing times change accordingly. Also remember to change the ISO dial to "lie" to the camera, and shoot doing what the meter tells you. You can find the developing times for pushing at the Ilford site if you're using HP5. Also, I'd recommend Microphen developer for pushing. See the attached example, it's Hp5 pushed to 1600, developed in Microphen.

[Socke]

I had usable results with HP5 at EI1600 in Amaloco AM74 1+19 and D76 1+4. Personaly I like Tri-X at EI1600 in D76 1+4 better than HP5.

[wintoid]

HP5 has become my favourite film for pushing, surpassing TriX (it's all personal). Here's one in DDX pushed to 1600.

[Johnmcd]

Creagerj,

I used to push HP5 at 1600 all the time on my old OM1 whilst photographing weddings inside the church with no flash as it was not allowed. The grain suited the church interior, especially if there was lots of sandstone etc. I would process in Microphen.

I would just set the asa at 1600 and fire away, then give the extra development time as stated during processing. Microphen comes with all times printed to match what you exposed at.

Now I'm back shooting some film, HP5 will be my main load. I suppose it's what you are comfortable with. My brother swears by Tri-X...

Here's an old wedding shoot. I'm pretty sure it would have been at 1600. Grain is lost to a degree because it has been resized down.



Cheers

John

[marcust101]

I've been using HP5 at 3200 developing in Rodinal with suprisingly fine grain and clarity. I've tried 1/25, 1/50 and 1/100 dilutions and found 1/50 slow (36 mins in dev tank) but very nice tone and even grain.

my 2 c

[AOI Photo]

Odly enough I get best results with Hp5 @ 1600 in good old hc110 Dilution a 5.5 minutes
Examples

Those samples show blown highlights and a very low range of usable tones, to my eye. Which is exactly the experience I have had processing HP5 at 1600 in both Ilfotec DD and XTOL.

HP5 is quite an amazing film at 400 and as much as I am nuts about supporting Ilford, Trix just pushes better, carries more tones along with it.

I will say, however that Ilford Delta 400 does perform quite well at 1600. I'm actually amidst my own testing to determine which I like best between the two of Delta 400 and Trix at EI1600.

Perhaps there are some better developers out there for pushing HP5 past 800 but I have no experience with them.

Here's some of my HP5 at 1600:

[Avotius]

here is mine, hp5 shot at 3200, developed for 20 some minutes in LC29 at 1+29

[Wimpler]

Avotius did you forget to mirror or are you just very proud of your "nonac" camera? Why aren't you just buying a faster film, like delta 3200?

[kully]

I've shot HP5 at 1600+DDX a couple of times and like it.

It's all down to personal preference - I wouldn't do it all the time but the high contrast, high grain look is satisfying sometimes.

[Viktor Sebastian]

I am considering buying a bulk roll of this film + all the gadgets required (film camera etc).

Would be nice to see more images showing how far this film can be pushed.

[Ljós]

Originally Posted by Creagerj

I guess that HP5 can be shot a iso 1600, what is the best way to do this? Should I set my camera to meter like I am shooting iso 1600 and then have it developed as iso 1600 film, or should I shoot at 400 and have it pushed to 1600?

Also, what kind of results does HP5 give at 1600? Does anyone have any examples?

Joe, as others already said in this thread: "lie" to the camera. It is unethical :-), but do it anyway.
Let's use an example: you have HP5 in your camera, which is set to 400 iso. Your lens has a max. aperture of, say, f2. You point the camera at something midtoned, and the metering tells you 1/4 of a second. You know that if you photograph people interacting and talking with each other, you can expect a blur fest at that speed, even without the blur from your own camerashake. So you set your camera to 1600 and get speeds in the 1/15 range. Not overly comfortable, but certainly better than 1/4s. You could then say - also to a lab, if you do not develop your own - that you "exposed it at 1600". But the mere saying so does not physically alter the properties of the film you used - you are underexposing your HP5 by two stops that way. So you would in most scenarios ask the lab to "push" the film. Even that will not alter the physical sensitivity of the film, but it will help heaving the midtones into something that looks less murky than if you developed normally. The increased development will also increase the grain and the overall contrast.

Since you asked about the "how do I shoot it", camera set to 400 or 1600, here is what would happen if you kept the camera at 400 in the same situation: You would not want to push that film two stops, since it got properly exposed from the get go. But you would in all likelihood have a lot of camera shake und motion blur. (These COULD be very fine pics, by the way. Just the chances of catching facial expressions etc. would be higher with scenario 1).

Hope that helps!
Greetings, Ljós

[40oz]

Originally Posted by Wimpler

... Why aren't you just buying a faster film, like delta 3200?

IMHO, faster films look different than pushed HP5. I find that I don't like the look of a 3200 speed film compared to pushed Tri-X or HP5, even at 3200. It's all about personal preference.

[ChrisCummins]

Personally I like the look of HP5 at 1600. Grain becomes very noticeable, and contrasty.

[Arvay]

HP5 @ 1600 + Microphen (stock) 20C

[sebastel]

@Arvay:

blown highlights, blown highlights ...!







(just kidding. very nice photo.)

[Arvay]

Originally Posted by sebastel

@Arvay:

blown highlights, blown highlights ...!


(just kidding. very nice photo.)

It's quick scanning on Canon 8800. Nikon 8000 gave more dynamic range