Friday, December 12, 2014

Friday Featured Film Spotlight - Ilford HP5

Our Friday Featured Film this week is Ilford's Black & White HP5 Plus.

Ilford HP5 does a great job in most lighting conditions when shot at 400ISO, however if you find yourself caught out on a particularly light or dark day, HP5 has a wide exposure latitude and I've had great luck pushing and pulling it. In general it yields middle of the road tones with nice contrast. It is interesting to try different developers with various films though, as they will each yield a slightly different result, especially when it comes to the contrast of your film.

If you compare the Ilford Delta 400 to the HP5 400, and look at it very closely, you will notice they have a different grain structure. The Delta has a T grain structure whereas the HP5 has a cubic grain structure. This means the actual physical shape of the individual grain in the film is different, giving each film a distinguishable look. The Delta film with its T grain shapes tends to look more fine grained, and you don't notice the grain as much. The cubic shape of the HP5 grain is more pronounced, giving it more of a grainy look. I personally like that effect of the HP5 and prefer a bit more pronounced grain in my photos.

Here are a few photos from my family farm in Manitoba this summer shot on HP5 120 with Nicole's RolleiCord.










HP5 is available year-round in several sizes: 35mm, 120, 4x5 and 8x10 sheet films. Though if you're the really experimental type, Ilford has their ULF sale once a year, usually in June. During this time there’s a variety of unique sizes available, everything from 2.25 x 3.25 inches to 20x24 cut sheets. One would place their order in June and receive their order in fall, as everything is cut especially for individual orders. Please contact the film department if you would like to place an order or need more information. 

2 comments:

  1. Size 120 or you really have super wide 120mm film? (120 is slightly over 60mm wide)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Whoops! Thank you for pointing out that typo! It's been corrected now.

    ReplyDelete