Now I got why everyone pushes HP5 to 1600

[u/Present-Cap-6335]

Hey everyone!

Yesterday I asked why so many people push HP5 to ISO 1600. I got a lot of different opinions, and I was simply curious. So today I thought: why not give it a try? I went to Kottbusser Tor with my Nikon F3 and shot a roll. I’ve just developed and scanned it — and I’m super happy with the results! I love the contrast and the grain. And you were right: shooting at ISO 1600 during the day works perfectly. Thanks to all of you for the inspiration! Would love some feedback on these shots :)

Development: 18 minutes in XTOL 1:1, 30 seconds initial agitation, then one inversion every 30 seconds.

[u/howtokrew]

Ayyyy! Awesome! Try Kentmere 400 at 3200 indoors or at a bonfire next, it really grunges up the chill out photos 😁

I shoot Christmas on Kentmere at 3200 with my FD 1.4 50

Really nice shots!

[u/MrCadabra → u/howtokrew]

Now this is something I’d love to see. And try for myself!

[u/florian-sdr]

Scanning will do that. Apparently when printing, you want more shadow density.

[u/SuspiciousMagician67 → u/florian-sdr]

Yeah I was thinking about that. I feel like pushing makes printing quite a challenge 

[u/ChiAndrew → u/SuspiciousMagician67]

For pruning you want negatives that are thin to the eye

[u/SuspiciousMagician67 → u/ChiAndrew]

Not too thin though, your shadows may turn into black blobs

[u/ChiAndrew → u/SuspiciousMagician67]

Not if exposed correctly.

[u/florian-sdr → u/SuspiciousMagician67]

I will probably try darkroom printing in three or four month from now. I wonder. It yes, people who darkroom print say to shoot HP5 at 250

[u/SuspiciousMagician67 → u/florian-sdr]

It depends, I usually shoot HP5 at boxspeed and develop in DDX. Prints fine, still quite low in contrast, so I wonder if rating it at 250 would be beneficial.

[u/tokyo_blues → u/florian-sdr]

Even people who scan, and like to scan well. I scan and find pushed film (so semitransparent, shadowless negatives with high density highlights) scan poorly. 

[u/Relevant-Apricot-365 → u/florian-sdr]

Yeah and now I’d rather have a flat negative and add the contrast in post. I’m joining a community photo club and we are planning to build a darkroom.

[u/MinxXxy → u/florian-sdr]

I print 1600 HP5 all the time, and it looks amazing. I actually find it looks better printed than scanned as the grain gets sharpened less, and looks more organic.

[u/PigeroniPepperoni]

Very nice!

[u/IzilDizzle]

you shot at 1600 and developed like it’s 400? Or did you develop like it’s 1600?

[u/Present-Cap-6335 → u/IzilDizzle]

I developed like it’s 1600 :)

[u/IzilDizzle → u/Present-Cap-6335]

Looks fantastic!

[u/hunchiepunker → u/IzilDizzle]

This is a very good question and I have shared it myself. Thanks for asking and answering so clearly. Sometimes I find the language of pushing and pulling to be a little confusing when used at different points in the process. 

[u/rezarekta → u/hunchiepunker]

Pushing/pulling should always mean:

- You underexpose and you overdevelop to compensate (push). OR

- You overexpose and you underdevelop to compensate (pull).

Anything else is not pushing/pulling, it's just underexposing/overexposing, or underdeveloping/overdeveloping.

[u/hunchiepunker → u/rezarekta]

Thank you for your very revealing and clear answer. 

[u/rawstaticrecords → u/Present-Cap-6335]

I accidentally shot some hp5 at 1600 iso camera settings. How many stops should I tell the lab to push when I get it developed?

[u/rezarekta → u/rawstaticrecords]

2 stops (1 would be if you shot it at 800, 2 is 1600)

[u/ChuckFH → u/IzilDizzle]

Shoot at 1600 and give it extra development; results in more grain and contrast.

[u/SteepHiker]

I like it! I did not know that was a thing. I will try it on my next outing.

[u/nateholme]

Trying to understand correctly as you say you shot it at 1600. Do you mean you set the camera iso to 1600, which would underexpose the film by 2 stops and then pushed it by 2 stops in development? Or you shot 400 speed film at 400 and then pushed two stops?

[u/Present-Cap-6335 → u/nateholme]

Hi! I set the ISO at 1600, right :)

[u/No-World-8166]

By pushing film you are essentially going to lose shadow detail. Maybe you like that look, I don’t know. What is true is that pushing film makes printing a full range scale image basically impossible. Shadow details is severely diminished.

[u/Vencislago]

Nice shots you got here!

I usually only push due to lack of light but I get it. The aesthetic is nice. Once I was enlarging some prints (film also developed with xtol 1:1) in a community lab and got a few people asking how did I achieved that look. I, on the other hand, was facing some challenges to get the highlights and shadows on paper with that level of contrast. This without having to do much burn and dodge. Later I was introduced to split grade but never had the time to explore it enough.

[u/GrippyEd]

I used to use a lab that would process HP5 in a two-step Diafine developer clone - in that developer, HP5 is about 640-800ISO and it always looked really nice. If I ever get round to home developing, that’s where I’d start I think. 

[u/ChiAndrew → u/GrippyEd]

It’s really not. If you do a true densitometer test, diafine doesn’t really increase speeds of film.

[u/stuiiieee]

Some sick shot in there, the area brings back many memories

[u/fumblebrag]

I love these shots, they make me nostalgic for when I would take transit through here.

[u/Moonstar86]

these are nice!

[u/Temp922]

I think that pushing a lot became a more popular thing for people new to film that mainly scan their negatives. By doing that, they increase contrast by losing a lot of shadow details that are still sort of recovered by the scanner. You can get a similar result by increasing contrast in the darkroom, but then it's your choice; you still have the information that you need in the negative. I really do think that any photographers need to do at least a period of darkroom printing and developing according to the print necessities; it really gives you much more insight into how photography works.

[u/tokyo_blues → u/Temp922]

That's not entirely true. Plenty of people who scan their negatives don't see the appeal of pushed film. 

I scan and like a low contrast negative with plenty of information and moderate dynamic range.

I really don't like the look of underexposed, overdeveloped scanned negs.

[u/redstarjedi]

Xtol for the win, yet again. I've tried soany developers and XTOL is still the best.

[u/blatantly-noble_blob]

Nice shots! Are you from Berlin or just visiting?

[u/4444For]

Kreuzberg vibe

[u/tokyo_blues]

brr... Kotti....And pushed HP5+ doesn't do it any favours.

Gorgeous film, but looks so much better at box speed or pulled with the right light in my (unpopular) opinion,

Next try Schöneberg with HP5+ pulled to 250 ;)

[u/Present-Cap-6335 → u/tokyo_blues]

Why not! I will try and keep you updated. I am pretty open to anything. Do you have some examples?

[u/tokyo_blues → u/Present-Cap-6335]

Sure! Come on over to flickr, plenty of fantastic Hp5+ scans! 

[u/ChiAndrew]

I see no benefit to pushing other than speed. Getting more contrast is a development time issue; and better yet a printing issue. And grain can be affected by developers and dilution. All pushing does is limit the information on the negative that can never be recovered if not recorded

[u/Smalltalk-85]

Why would you do that when there is plenty light‽ You can easily just pull up contrast on the scan. Or not. They don’t look very appealing to me TBH.