Good to Go: Ilford XP2 super at 800asa?

[lowep]

What difference can I expect to see if I shoot Ilford XP2 Super at 800iso instead of 400iso then standard C41 develop?

After several years of digital darkroom I want to shoot B&W film again but no longer have a wet darkroom, so just ordered some Ilford XP2 Super that I will get C41 processed at a color lab instead - but have never used this film before. Mostly shot Tmax 400.

The Ilford XP2 film spec sheet says: "Although rated at ISO 400/27°, XP2 SUPER can be exposed over the range EI 50/18–800/30. When higher speed is needed, XP2 SUPER can be rated at up to EI 800/30. For finer grain, when speed is less important, rate the film at EI 200/24, although for finest grain it can be rated as low as EI 50/18 if required."

Since this should be done, according to the spec sheet, with no pushing or pulling of the C41 processing, does this mean the latitude of the film is sufficient that it can cope with being over or underexposed one f-stop from its nominal 400iso rating down to 200iso and more importantly for me up to 800iso - ie can I just set my camera to 800iso and shoot same as I would do at 400iso then standard c41 develop without losing shadow detail or seeing a big increase in grain?

[Rob C]

Short answer: run a test using a set-up that includes sunlight and shadow; meter at a wide range of stops and then when it's been processed, have a look at the negs on a lightbox (or even against a white wall) and all will be revealed.

So much depends on how you use your meter that any arbitrary figure anyone might offer you is meaningless. I don't take all commercial labs as being created equal, either! I ran just such a test for myself some time ago and found that I didn't really care for the results. I did pride myself as a pretty good commercial printer, so you could do worse than follow my advice, but whatever you do, run those tests first! It's only going to be a single film you probably waste, yet if you decide it's for you, it will have been worth it! You might find that overexposure doesn't give the grain you expect, and vice versa with shadows...

Rob C

[WalterEG]

What difference can I expect to see if I shoot Ilford XP2 Super at 800iso instead of 400iso then standard C41 develop?

Hi Lowep,

Of the actual 'look' of the negative I cannot say having never done what you are intending.

HOWEVER, at the time of the release of the Chromogenic films the marketing hype was that you could shoot adjacent frames at varying ISO settings (might even have been ASA back then), process normally in C-41 or the dedicated soup, and expect fine results.

If you can get your hands on a copy of the Ilford Monochrome Practice by Coote (http://www.amazon.com/Ilford-Monochrome-Darkroom-Practice-Processing/dp/0240513681) there is an explanation of how and why this speed range is possible.  I can't find my copy at the moment.

There is also an olld discussion thread on Flickr concerning the same issue:  http://www.flickr.com/groups/blackandwhite/discuss/72157603523467665/#comment72157603523761021

Like most things I think it is really just a matter of suck-it-and-see.  What is acceptable to one man may be unacceptable to another.

Cheers,

W

[swimwivsquid]

It will be fine rated at 800asa through normal time in c-41 process However RobC is right and it is best to test depending on the subject that you are shooting. When I had a pro-lab we used to get a lot of xp1 & xp2 going through at normal time that was rated at 800. Sometimes it helps to push it by about 1/2 stop for some low key subjects. I would imagine that Xp2 super is an improvement on the previous films and probably has even more latitude.

[k bennett]

I shot a lot of XP2 back in the day, mostly 120 size for portraits and general commercial b&w. I  generally rated it at ISO 200 and that provided a nice tonal range, creamy highlights, and good shadow detail. At ISO 800 the neg is slightly thin, but still prints well. Overall the latitude of XP2 was very wide and a pretty much any neg could be printed.

[lowep]

super!

[elliot_n]

In good light (i.e. daylight) it's ok at 800, but in bad light (tungsten) I wouldn't rate it above 400.