Coming home tonight I stopped to take some shots inside a very old church that sits out on the prairie in the middle of the state in a wheat field. It's not in use anymore, so I had to go get the key from a nearby rancher. I used my 4x5 and took my time with adjusting the interior light (never been any electric power strung to this one!), metering, and checking focus several times as I went. I double checked that my meter ISO to be sure it was set on 125 for Ilford FP4. So, I took my shots and drove home. Half way home I realized that when I ordered film last month, I decided to not buy my usual FP4 but instead go for HP5 for the speed. ARGGGH!!!! I checked my film box when I got home, and sure enough it's HP5, ISO 400. So, is it likely these will come out fine anyway if I tell my lab? Or, should I just pull them out, reload, and drive the 200 miles back out there and get the key back to reshoot? I can't believe I still screw up like this from time to time.
Kent, I'd have your lab adjust the development. Tell them you exposed it for 125 and to have them pull the processing down to that exposure. A good lab should have no problem with it...
Kent, I'm not sure how well HP5 will hold up to pull processing, but you might try having one or two sheets pull processed to guage the quality before deciding on the next step.
Your total pull processing would be about 1-2/3 stops. That much pull would most likely raise havoc with the low value densities since they would be under-developed. I would suggest a 1-stop pull. Your low value densities would not suffer too much and the high-value densities may be printable.
Careful printing would be called for. If you are printing in a "wet" darkroom, a softer grade paper exposed with a cold-light head will work the best. If you are scanning the neg, a drum scan may be required to hold detail in the high values and to realize shadow detail.
By chance, my lab guy called me today about another matter. He told me that many of his other customers routinely shoot HP5 at ISO 200 to bring out shadow detail, and they come out OK. He said that since I shot two sheets of the same thing with same exposure, he could probably make it come out OK, especially since the light was pretty even in the shots. So, I'll give it a try. When the things cost five bucks a pop, I tend to get a little conservative and consider cutting my losses. Thanks for the ideas and I'll let you know how they come out.
I have no idea how many times I have exposed with the wrong ASA, but they almost always work out ok unless they are like 5 ratings off.
As for what I'd do there, you are talking about sheet film, so tell the processor what the problem was, then make sure that they ONLY develop one sheet to first test out the new rating. If that works out then tell them to do all the others the same. If it doesn't work out tell them to develop at another rating and keep on doing that untill they do get a good one. Then the rest can all be done at that setting.
This will cost you more than doing them all at once and having them all screwed up, but what is gas going to cost you to make another trip! With luck the first test will be enough and you will only have to pay for two sets. If I remember right HP film is B&W so you already have two stops of latitude built in anyway. even if they developed it at the 125 rating you can still get good images from them. Not good like the correct ASA would be, but with the lab making the correction you will have no problem with them.
400 is the manufactureers rating for that film.
What have you tested to make sure it is with your equipment?
It could be off two stops just from what you shoot with.
I used to shoot a lot of Tri-X and had to rate it at 640 to get a correct exposure with my old Nikon-F.
Discussion
9 repliesKent in SD
Good luck,
How could you be so careless.... I' have only done this ....oh.... about 5 times!
Sounds like a cool subject!
JG
Good luck.
Your total pull processing would be about 1-2/3 stops. That much pull would most likely raise havoc with the low value densities since they would be under-developed. I would suggest a 1-stop pull. Your low value densities would not suffer too much and the high-value densities may be printable.
Careful printing would be called for. If you are printing in a "wet" darkroom, a softer grade paper exposed with a cold-light head will work the best. If you are scanning the neg, a drum scan may be required to hold detail in the high values and to realize shadow detail.
I hope it works out for you!
-PB
Kent in SD
As for what I'd do there, you are talking about sheet film, so tell the processor what the problem was, then make sure that they ONLY develop one sheet to first test out the new rating. If that works out then tell them to do all the others the same. If it doesn't work out tell them to develop at another rating and keep on doing that untill they do get a good one. Then the rest can all be done at that setting.
This will cost you more than doing them all at once and having them all screwed up, but what is gas going to cost you to make another trip! With luck the first test will be enough and you will only have to pay for two sets. If I remember right HP film is B&W so you already have two stops of latitude built in anyway. even if they developed it at the 125 rating you can still get good images from them. Not good like the correct ASA would be, but with the lab making the correction you will have no problem with them.
400 is the manufactureers rating for that film.
What have you tested to make sure it is with your equipment?
It could be off two stops just from what you shoot with.
I used to shoot a lot of Tri-X and had to rate it at 640 to get a correct exposure with my old Nikon-F.