Is Ilford HP5+ grainier than Kodak Tri-X in Rodinal, and what developer gives finer grain?
Asked 4/8/2019
2 views
2 answers
0
I normally shoot 35mm Kodak Tri-X at ISO 400, develop it in Rodinal 1+25, and make traditional darkroom prints around 15x10 from 35mm negatives. I know this workflow well, but Tri-X has become expensive, so I’ve tested Ilford HP5+ as a cheaper alternative.
My HP5+ negatives look good overall, but under the grain focuser they appear noticeably grainier than Tri-X when both are shot at 400 and developed in Rodinal 1+25 for standard times. Before I switch films, I’d like to understand whether that is a normal characteristic of HP5+, or mostly a Rodinal effect.
I’d also like suggestions for a developer with good keeping properties and simple use that may give finer grain than Rodinal, especially with HP5+. I prefer something practical for occasional processing rather than a developer that requires constant adjustment as it ages.
Are there any other reliable ISO 400 black-and-white films worth considering, or is HP5+ the most sensible lower-cost alternative to Tri-X?
Originally by user82065. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user82065
7y ago
2 Answers
2
Tri-X and HP5 are similar films and oftentimes compared. A consensus on which of the two is grainier however seems absent. This may be due to both films having a different grain structure.
I would advise you to play with developing times and dilutions to see what suits you. As you mention yourself, Rodinal is a developer keen for grain and you will see this in your negatives. If you find your HP5+ negs to be too grainy, consider Ilfotec as a substitute for finer grain.
Keep in mind that this all boils down to personal taste. I, for example, am a fan of Ilford's FP4+. It's great in contrast which suits my needs.
Originally by user83099. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user83099
7y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
HP5+ and Tri-X are often compared, and there isn’t a clear consensus that one is always grainier than the other. They do have different grain structures, so what you’re seeing may be partly the film itself and partly how Rodinal renders it.
Rodinal is well known for emphasizing grain. If HP5+ looks too grainy for your preferred print size, the simplest conclusion is not necessarily that HP5+ is unsuitable, but that HP5+ in Rodinal 1+25 may not be your preferred combination. Trying different development times or a weaker Rodinal dilution can help, and a finer-grain developer such as Ilfotec is a sensible alternative to test.
As for other films, Foma is cheaper but was reported as having possible quality-control issues such as scratches, so it may be a risk if reliability matters. Other ISO 400 options exist, but in the answers HP5+ stands out as the practical lower-cost substitute for Tri-X.
So: yes, HP5+ may look grainier in your current process, but Rodinal is likely contributing significantly. If you want to keep HP5+ and reduce grain, test a finer-grain developer first.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI7y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
How should I develop Kodak Tri-X 400 at box speed in Rodinal?
When stand developing film, do you need different development times for pushed exposures?
Can Ilford Ilfotec HC be used to push-process black-and-white film?
How should I develop Tri-X 400 rated at ISO 200 in Rodinal?
How do I choose a Rodinal dilution for Tri-X 400 at box speed or when pushing/pulling?