Ilford FP4+ Motion Picture Film.

Just ordered 20 rolls , Thanks
 
Thanks for the heads up Mark!
 
Thanks for bumping the thread, I'd missed it previously. A dozen rolls ordered because it's been ages since t'missus has rolled her eyes at me receiving photography bits in the post. :D
 
Thank you for posting those Kevin, It handles the high contrast on the interior rather well.

I have just downloaded the developer times pdf from Analogue Cameras and I am pleased to see they have tested it at speeds from ISO 50 to 200 and with a wide range of developers including Xtol which I am going to use for my first roll this evening.
 
That looks encouraging. I have a roll in my camera at the moment. So, I'm always pleased to see the results.
 
Last edited:
Not used any of my rolls yet :confused:
 
I just spoke to Dan at https://www.analoguecameras.co.uk/ after a delivery charge hiccup (on the website) which he sorted immediately.

What a perfect gentleman he is - I shall keep my eye on his used camera stocks and buy from him again for sure. I'm now waiting for this film to try . . .
 
I am just scanning my first roll. What I do notice are some quite bad light leaks, something the Aria has not suffered from before, I am suspecting the shiny white and steel coloured cassette and a less than perfect light seal around the film viewing window.
On the good side it is quite curl free and sits flat in the Epson V700 film holders unlike my dwindling stock of APX 100 which dishes along the length of the film holders.
The contrast looks a little low but again that could be the Aria fogging it a bit.
 
A bit of black insulating tape over the film detail viewing window should stop stray light and if that does prove to be the source of the fogging, the window's light seals could be replaced to stop the leaks in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zx9
Nod said:
A bit of black insulating tape over the film detail viewing window should stop stray light and if that does prove to be the source of the fogging, the window's light seals could be replaced to stop the leaks in the future.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is very easy to replace light seals, I have various thicknesses of both foam and felt that I have used on several cameras. Usually it is easy to spot a sticky or crumbling foam but I had not noticed this before, the last film (APX100) was un affected. I am probably my own wort enemy in that I don't use a camera bag preferring to just carry a camera by it's shoulder strap, I have to admit it was a very bright day on Friday when I used this film.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Hope you can get whatever the issue is sorted easily, cheaply and quickly!
 
  • Like
Reactions: zx9
Sky said:
I just spoke to Dan at https://www.analoguecameras.co.uk/ after a delivery charge hiccup (on the website) which he sorted immediately.

What a perfect gentleman he is - I shall keep my eye on his used camera stocks and buy from him again for sure. I'm now waiting for this film to try . . .
Click to expand...
I'm interested in this since I was going to order some until it asked for £30 postage to Highland. We're used to being ripped off by couriers, but that was particularly excessive, so no sale.
 
Peter B said:
I'm interested in this since I was going to order some until it asked for £30 postage to Highland.
Click to expand...

This was the same problem - apparently the couriers think the Isle of Wight is 'abroad'. He changed it to Royal Mail and it was OK, so it might be worth giving him a call. (y)
 
Some edits of my Ilford FP4 typ.517 cine film, processed in Xtol stock, obviously all shot in Highgate Cemetery and selected from the non fogged frames.

Highgate Cemetery 2024-07-29-0034 by Keith Hudson, on Flickr

Highgate Cemetery 2024-07-29-0032 by Keith Hudson, on Flickr

Highgate Cemetery 2024-07-29-0030 by Keith Hudson, on Flickr

Highgate Cemetery 2024-07-29-0026 by Keith Hudson, on Flickr

As they have all been done a thousand times, have another.

Highgate Cemetery 2024-07-29-0012 by Keith Hudson, on Flickr

Verdict? It is rather nice, stays flat in the scanner, has a Kodak PlusX ish look (?) and is very easy to edit. I only wish I could print some of the negatives in a dark room, alas I can not.
 
Some great results, really glad you got to try it out. It's not going to last forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zx9
My films arrived today, packed better than some camera equipment I've bought in the past! Now I need more excuses to not shoot any of it, the old ones are almost worn out. :thinking:
 
Kevin Allan said:
I read that Second Hand Darkroom Supplies had spun off a separate company for selling non-darkroom stuff - so perhaps Analogue Cameras is that company.
Click to expand...
It was publicised last year that SHD that after going off line last year then reopened with a second company Analogue Cameras sharing the same premises The boss is the same and the items they sell are the same selection but apparently there was an opportunity to place the 'photographic ancillaries' and cameras seperate from each other but complimenting one another.

For what it is worth, the single roll I have tried so far suggests that the grain is slightly coarser although that may be as a result of a direct scan so a scan of a print my show there is little or no difference. The negatives were certainly good and sharp with contrast that was easy to handle, let me see it that holds up when wet processed.
 
Last edited:
zx9 said:
Yes, it is very easy to replace light seals, I have various thicknesses of both foam and felt that I have used on several cameras. Usually it is easy to spot a sticky or crumbling foam but I had not noticed this before, the last film (APX100) was un affected. I am probably my own wort enemy in that I don't use a camera bag preferring to just carry a camera by it's shoulder strap, I have to admit it was a very bright day on Friday when I used this film.
Click to expand...
A tip from way back was to put a bit of chicken foil behind the tape, if you tape over the window. Some of the thiner tapes let IR light through which could affect some films. Thay said things like duct tape is probably plenty thick enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zx9
Rodinal said:
It was publicised last year that SHD that after going off line last year then reopened with a second company Analogue Cameras sharing the same premises The boss is the same and the items they sell are the same selection but apparently there was an opportunity to place the 'photographic ancillaries' and cameras seperate from each other but complimenting one another.

For what it is worth, the single roll I have tried so far suggests that the grain is slightly coarser although that may be as a result of a direct scan so a scan of a print my show there is little or no difference. The negatives were certainly good and sharp with contrast that was easy to handle, let me see it that holds up when wet processed.
Click to expand...
I have printed 3 negatives and there were very easy with no shading really necessary. The contrast was a bit higher than I like and for one I had to resort to Gd1 MG 4 paper. The other 2 printed normally on Gd 1.5. I also enlarged one negative to the equivalent of 16" wide (20x16 print) which is bigger than I can handle, my dishes only go up to 12x16. The print was central section of one of the other negs printed onto Multigrade paper using filtration of Gd 1.5. The quality held up and the same filter was used and only a close inspection were you able to see grain.

When scanned using an Epson 600 scanner the definition was there and the obvious edge sharpness was very good, however the scanned negatives viewed on the desktop screen were disappointing with the quality way below the wet prints. They had the appearance of being poorly reproduced and the grain was more obvious.

It is distinguishable from modern FP4+ but only if placed side by side, and the extended developing times are a bit tedious. They suggest 18mins in ID11, (Yes I still have some), but I developed the film using my rotary JOBO processor and reduced the time by the recommended 15% to 15mins23 seconds. This made the time a little too long, hence the extra contrast, so the next roll I use will be developed for 15 mins only. Shadow detail hold up well and when printing onto photographic paper, only a minimum of dodging or burning would be necessary to improve the prints. I would be happy to use it and not only because of the very reasonable price.
 
Last edited:
Oh, that's interesting. The FP4+ would seem to have more punch. But the FP4 is pleasant enough.
 
I used some after a 'Clip Test' in my 1965 LEICA M2 on a trip to Brick Lane with some Camera Club / FLICKR Mates and did it in my home-made 2-bath Formula for 4.5 Mins each bath @ 20oC and got great negs but TOO HOT to do Darkroom Printing at the moment so only Neg Scans --
Brick Lane 01 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Brick Lane 03 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Brick Lane 04 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Only HALF a NEG SCAN here --
Brick Lane 05 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr

I think Dan Kerin deserves our support as he has invested loads of DOSH into this project
 
pentaxpete said:
I used some after a 'Clip Test' in my 1965 LEICA M2 on a trip to Brick Lane with some Camera Club / FLICKR Mates and did it in my home-made 2-bath Formula for 4.5 Mins each bath @ 20oC and got great negs but TOO HOT to do Darkroom Printing at the moment so only Neg Scans --
Brick Lane 01 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Brick Lane 03 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Brick Lane 04 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Only HALF a NEG SCAN here --
Brick Lane 05 by Peter Elgar, on Flickr

I think Dan Kerin deserves our support as he has invested loads of DOSH into this project
Click to expand...
Good results, Peter
 
  • Like
Reactions: zx9
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top