As a point of curiosity, I have a question for all of you regarding HP5. In all my tests, it was the single worst performing film available. The grainis horrible, the emulsion makes the film inherently soft, and the only acutance to speak of is a measurable increase in the visibility of thegrain. Mind you, this is based on testing and not usage, so my question is; why do any of you use it? What feedback do you receive from the final imagethat causes you to like the film?
I tested Tri-X and HP5+ side by side, and to my surprise, HP5+ was less grainy, by a little bit. I think my developer was DDX 1+4. That was several years ago.
I love HP5+. For some reason, I don't like the appearance of films like T-max. That straight curve looks weird to me in a print, sort of clinical. I like the toe and shoulder characteristics of old style films. They seem more "romantic" or something. I know that doesn't make sense, because theoretically, the shadows and highlights should be "better" in straight grain films. But it's just a matter of taste I suppose.
Also I've found that T grain films often are finicky about development. There's less margin for error. If you make a mistake, they actually look grainier than old style films.
--shannon ============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
