Topic: Ilford Delta 100 vs FP4+

[Indofunk]

I recently came into the possession of 2 rolls each of Delta 100 and FP4+. What's the difference, and what should I expect from each? The internets tell me that Delta films are T grain, and FP/HP are "traditional" grain. The only T grain film I've shot is TMax 100, which I loved (especially for portraits), but I still always default back to my favorite Tri-X.

I'm just gonna have fun with these films, as 2 each is not enough time to properly test them and come up with a perfect (to me) exposure and development scheme. Oh, I'll be developing in HC110, probably dilution H. I shot HP5+ once, and it came out great in HC110H for 10 min. Figure I'll start with that for both the Delta100 and the FP4+.

I did find HP5+ much more mid toney and less contrasty than Tri-X (in addition, I find TMax to be more midtoney as well, though not as midtoney as HP5+ and no less contrasty than Tri-X). Will the same hold true for these Ilford films?

Oh, final question, I shoot them both at 100, right? Even though the FP4+ is rated at 125? (why did they rate it at a 1/4 stop?)

[jharr]

I think in general T-grain emulsions have a flatter response curve with less toe and shoulder. Some people don't like that 'flatness', but I find it very appealing and like shooting Delta 100 and T-Max. I have some old expired FP4 Plus rebranded as "Professional Film", but I always manage to scratch it, so maybe it is softer than other emulsions. I would just shoot at box speed. It's just a meter setting right?

[Indofunk]

I think in general T-grain emulsions have a flatter response curve with less toe and shoulder. Some people don't like that 'flatness', but I find it very appealing and like shooting Delta 100 and T-Max. I have some old expired FP4 Plus rebranded as "Professional Film", but I always manage to scratch it, so maybe it is softer than other emulsions. I would just shoot at box speed. It's just a meter setting right?

Ohhhhh, were you the one who gave me a roll of super-old FP4? I remember I scratched the sh*t out of it too! I'll remember to be extra careful with these rolls!    Maybe not squeegie it at all? 

[jharr]

I think in general T-grain emulsions have a flatter response curve with less toe and shoulder. Some people don't like that 'flatness', but I find it very appealing and like shooting Delta 100 and T-Max. I have some old expired FP4 Plus rebranded as "Professional Film", but I always manage to scratch it, so maybe it is softer than other emulsions. I would just shoot at box speed. It's just a meter setting right?

Ohhhhh, were you the one who gave me a roll of super-old FP4? I remember I scratched the sh*t out of it too! I'll remember to be extra careful with these rolls!    Maybe not squeegie it at all? 

Yeah I think that was me. It could be that is got scratched loading it in the cartridge, but I don't see that with other films, so I do try to handle that one with extra care.

[02Pilot]

Can't speak to Delta, but I've shot a fair bit of FP4+. Never had a problem with it scratching, so if it's of reasonably recent vintage you should be OK on that count. It's very much like HP5+, with a little more contrast and slightly finer grain. I shoot all my B&W films at half box speed, but that's just me. I find I like it better in 120 for some reason. Check the website I posted in the Articles subforum for a little more info on how it looks in different developers and compared to other emulsions (Delta is in there too).

[astrobeck]

I like Delta...a lot.
So much that I've been buying it in 100 foot rolls for bulk loading.
I like it for pinhole stuff and I also really LOVE it because it is one of the flattest films I've ever used as far as scanning goes.!
No curl or warp or anything funky.  It's just nice and flat.
Easy to scan.  That's worth extra points IMHO.

[Indofunk]

I like Delta...a lot.
So much that I've been buying it in 100 foot rolls for bulk loading.
I like it for pinhole stuff and I also really LOVE it because it is one of the flattest films I've ever used as far as scanning goes.!
No curl or warp or anything funky.  It's just nice and flat.
Easy to scan.  That's worth extra points IMHO.

That IS worth extra points! Neopan was the same for me the once or twice I shot it. But again, I keep coming back to Tri-X because I love the look But now I'm excited to shoot the Delta100!!

[Indofunk]

Can't speak to Delta, but I've shot a fair bit of FP4+. Never had a problem with it scratching, so if it's of reasonably recent vintage you should be OK on that count. It's very much like HP5+, with a little more contrast and slightly finer grain. I shoot all my B&W films at half box speed, but that's just me. I find I like it better in 120 for some reason. Check the website I posted in the Articles subforum for a little more info on how it looks in different developers and compared to other emulsions (Delta is in there too).

Ok, this is encouraging too. Like HP5 but more contrasty? Looking forward to shooting the FP4 too!

Now, which camera to shoot these in ....

[Francois]

The last few pinholes I posted were done using fp4+ in my Ondu. I was expecting scratches since there is so much friction on the winding on these cameras but to my surprise the film was fine.
The tonal rendition is flatter than I expected. But it was shot in a pinhole which isn't actually a high contrast optics.

[cs1]

First post on this forum. I've only returned to analogue photography last year (inspired by ManuelL's example ) so please don't expect expert experience, just my amateurish 2 cents.

I used the Delta 100 a short while ago and was very pleased with the results. I developed it using Tetenal Ultrafin T-Plus which Tetenal claims to have specifically designed for T grain films. The photos really seem to have a nice and flat tonal curve. In my eyes this works really well for landscapes with a lot of details and lots of different lighting conditions in the same image. The amount of details you get with the Delta 100 is amazing.

The FP4+ (one of my favourite films that I usually develop using Rodinal) on the other hand is nice for images that have contrasty textures. BTW, developing the FP4+ using Tetenal Ultrafin T-Plus works really well, too. It looks more detailed compared to FP4+ developed using Rodinal.

To summarise: I'd use the Delta 100 for photos where you want very even characteristics across the whole tonal range and the FP4+ for punchy contrasts e. g. for contrasty textures etc.. I'm sure you'll like both films.

[jharr]

so please don't expect expert experience

Welcome cs1. Glad to have another film waster on board! Head on over to the Meet the Filmwasters thread and tell us a little about yourself other than the fact that you can alliterate flawlessly!

[Indofunk]

Is CS1 Intro to Computer Science? Thanks for the advice. I'm getting that Delta = TMax and FP/HP = Tri-X, to compare them to the Kodak films I know. I'm gonna wait for the daylight to get a bit longer so I can shoot these 100ASA films. I'm sure I'll love them!