CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

This post collects some comments from online sources and seeks to demonstrate those comments when looking at the details of two Ilford 400-speed B&W films: Ilford HP5+ vs Ilford Delta 400. I've wondered myself why have two 400-speed products? What is the difference? How / if those differences show in the results?

Part of my own "return to film" is exploring the different film types. Today's film is primarily premium emulsions, shot in premium cameras, unlike back in the day when you'd grab a disposable camera at the gas station for an afternoon at the beach. The available film types also change somewhat regularly. For example, Fuji has both retired and restored Neopan ACROS 100 in the past 10-years. Fuji also just removed their color Pro 400H in all formats effective January 2021.

For the term film 'emulsion', this refers to how the silver halide grains are suspended in a gelatin colloid. Different film types, aka stocks, use different shapes of the silver halide grains, creating different 'looks' in how the film looks in terms of sharpness and the tone of the black and white contrast of the image.

This comparison is based on two Ilford stocks. If you're unfamiliar with Ilford, Ilford Photo started as Britannia Works Company in 1879 in the town of Ilford, England. The company changed their name to Ilford Limited in 1902. They're a leader in black and white films for now more than 100 years. Their HP5 line has a history stretching over 70-years. The full name of HP5+ is "Hypersensitive Panchromatic" and the latest version was launched in 1989. HP5 uses a more traditional cubic grain structure that delivers a classical B&W photography look.

Example 1 - Ilford HP5+
Scanned from Ilford HP5+ (shot at ISO 200)
EOS 1v, EF 35mm f/1.4L, 1/320 sec at f/5

Wrigley Field Marquee by Paul Sager, on Flickr


Ilford Delta 400 is a newer film, started in 1990 and reformulated in 1994. Delta 400 is a "T-grain" film (Tabular grain), this is slightly modified from a conventional-grain film in the way the film’s silver content is dispersed. T-grain films (such as Ilford Delta, Fuji Acros, Kodak T-Max) have flat crystals whereas conventional-grain films (like Ilford HP5, Kodak Tri-X, Rollei RPX) have round crystals. The flatness of the crystals permits better light absorption per quantity of silver within the emulsion. The theory of T-grain film is that it should provide sharper images and finer grain when compared to a conventional-grain film of the same sensitivity.

Example 2 - Ilford Delta 400
Scanned from Ilford Delta 400 (shot at ISO 100, expired 03/2006)
EOS 1v, EF 35mm f/1.4L, 1/160 sec at f/5

Wrigley Field


There are differences too in the exposure latitude of the two films and the development process. The HP5 is considered as having more lattitude in being over- or underexposed, possibly up to 5-stops with acceptable results. The Ilford Delta 400 has less lattitude, whether purposeful or in error, more around just + (or -) 1-stop exposure.

Personally, I don't develop my own film. I'll defer to others for their experience and recommendations on the home development of these film types. In my results and preferences, both films benefit from +1 stop of exposure over their 400 'box speed'. For new film cameras, this can be done by adjusting the Exposure Compensation, or changing (overriding) the ISO setting, or assuring the meter reads +1 over the 0-mark of your light meter's recommendation.

Finally, before getting into the details of specific images, I also use colored filters with my B&W film. These filters don't just lessen the light reaching the film, they also impact the camera's meter. As a rule of thumb, the exposure should be adjusted by +1 for yellow, +2 for orange and +3 for red. I've been working on my technique now for a few years and the combined +1 for the film and +2 for the orange filter (+3 combined) is giving me the results I've been seeking, see the final Cloud Gate image below.

Example 3 - Ilford HP5+
Scanned from Ilford HP5+ (shot at ISO 200)
EOS 1v, EF 35mm f/1.4L, 1/125 sec at f/6.3

Hot Stove Season


This post isn't intended to be a 1:1 compare of the two films. Other than the Marquee images, above, that happen to have the same lens and camera and advertising on different days, I don't have many similar shots from the two films.

These initial Ilford H5+ images (examples 1, 3 and 4) look at images without a color filter.

Example 4 - Ilford HP5+
Scanned from Ilford HP5+ (shot at ISO 400)
EOS 1v, EF 24mm f/1.4L, 1/40 sec at f/2.8

USS Cod - Galley


Hopefully, the differences of the two films are subtle, if at all, when looking at these scanned and processed images. The scanned JPEGs are all processed in Adobe Lightroom v6 and the posted JPEGs are resized to 1600-pixels wide to embed into this UHH post. The shot above of the dinner plates on the submarine begins to get 'close enough' to see the film grain. We'll look more closely at the grain via 100% crops in some examples below.

Example 5 - Ilford Delta 400
Scanned from Ilford Delta 400 (shot at ISO 400)
Canon AE-1, FD 24mm f/1.4L, shutter speed and aperture unknown

Bike The Drive


Example 6 - Ilford Delta 400
Scanned from Ilford Delta 400 (shot at ISO 400)
EOS 1v, EF 50mm f/1.8, 1/80 sec at f/9

1932 Studebaker / Route 66 Marker


As mentioned earlier, I don't have images that were captured / created for the purpose of a review of the film grain. These next two examples are neither 'good' or 'bad' nor even very 'different' in terms of film grain. I do feel the Delta image is modestly finer grain, if you simply shoot at the box speed of the film. The lighting differences in each situation probably contribute more to the difference than the film type.

Example 7 - Ilford HP5+



Example 8 - Ilford Delta 400



Finally, the images below present results using colored filters. I've been learning and gaining confidence to really increase the overexposure adjustment when using these filters. My preferred / desired result is the final Cloud Gate image. The first USS Cod (example 9) is underexposed with way more grain than I could have achieved with another +1 stop of exposure. Example 10 has a bit finer grain of the Delta 400, but still I should have been upping the exposure based on the film and the filter being used. The Cloud Gate example 11 accomplished 3-stops (ISO-200 and +2EC). Going forward, I'll probably just load the film as ISO-50 rather than the combination of settings when using fresh Ilford Delta 400 and an Orange filter.

Example 9 - Ilford HP5+
Scanned from Ilford HP5+ (shot at ISO 400)
EOS 1v, EF 24mm f/1.4L, 1/250 sec at f/5.6 and +2EC with dark red filter

USS Cod


Example 10 - Ilford Delta 400
Scanned from Ilford Delta (shot at ISO 400)
EOS 1v, EF 35mm f/1.4L, 1/640 sec at f/5.6, and +2EC with orange filter

San Jose Catholic Church


Example 11 - Ilford Delta 400
Scanned from Ilford Delta (shot at ISO 100)
EOS 1v, EF 35mm f/1.4L, 1/125 sec at f/6.3, and +1EC with orange filter

Cloud Gate

ELNikkor

Excellent photos and comparisons of Ilford B&W films! (I never even knew the back-story of Ilford until now.) Always respected Ilford for their quality and innovations, but, being from Rochester (and a Kodak family!), you what I've been mostly using!

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I have seen two significant differences:

1 - Less apparent grain in the t-grain film (also true of Tmax 400 vs Tri-X). This is not as noticeable in medium format. But a little grain can actually appear to slightly enhance sharpness when there is a lot of detail.

2 - A significantly higher price (more than 33% from B&H) for Delta 400 over HP5 or either of the Kodak films. The difference is less for medium format and the price differences may be less in the UK.

Both films can be developed to the same contrast but that's less important if you are scanning.

Developer choice will change the effective film speed even if you have the films developed in a lab. You should do some careful testing to determine the ISO.

In my opinion Delta 400 is no better than Tmax 400 and not 33% better than HP5.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Interesting thought on prices. Most of my film now is bought expired and / or in bulk and takes months to years to be taken from the freezer and used. New film purchases tend to be bought in 5-packs and used over six months to a year. I think all new film is expensive and usually don't look at prices of film-x vs film-y to think whether a film might be better simply based on price.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

All of my testing is now done. I am not doing as much film these days so the price of film really isn't much of a factor. One of my favorites is Fuji Acros. It's more expensive than Delta 100 and 50% more than Tmax 100.

B&W film is particularly stable if it has been refrigerated or frozen. But expired film presents a different hazard. I had just discovered Fuji Neopan 400 and was about to test it when Fuji decided to stop producing it. So it's a good idea to stick with popular films that are likely to stay in production.

But someone starting out might need to consider pricing if they are going to do a lot of experimenting to settle on a choice of film and developer. The testing can get expensive. I think that B&W film prices have increased about 50% to 80% over the past six years. Let's hope that has leveled off now.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The Acros II is expensive enough to catch my attention. I've only shot one (maybe two) of the first 4 rolls I bought when it came back. The old Neopan was popular with my camera when I review old scans and film tags. I'm surprised how little I see it being sold expired. Maybe it remains popular with those who have a frozen horde?

Where I've tried to coach on film, I try to emphasize using autofocus equipment and having the confidence to move off the box speed. There's nothing more disappointing than grainy out of focus frames, when there's a known cost per frame.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Nice examples! I no longer use film, but…

I used Tri-X in my youth, switching to HP5 (later HP5+) about my Freshman year of college (‘73). I liked Kodak T-Max about as much as Delta 400, but HP5 was usually in my bulk loader when I spooled B&W film.

Today, film users have it easy! The megastores carry many films and developers, and you can consult the “Massive Dev Chart” for times, temperatures, dilutions, and agitation methods that work well.

YouTube is full of film tests, scanner tests, how to process film training…

Processing film is about as simple as easy food recipes, and it gives you full control over pushing, pulling, and matching film, exposure, and developer to scenes.

richardsaccount

Chg-Canon. This is in the for what it's worth department. The submarine number 224 is the U.S.S. Cod. The last that I knew about it is docked in Cleveland, I think the sub that was there pryor was the U.S.S. Gar. Please correct me if I'm wrong. In fact recently they had a Halloween party on it for the kids. No pumpkin depth chargers though.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Thank you Bill! I've shot mostly film this entire year and I'm due to compose some new posts looking at the results in similar comparisons. Stay tuned.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Back in the day, my wife at the time had a corporate apartment in the Flats in Cleveland during a long-term consulting contract. But, the most time I've been in downtown Cleveland is only during the Labor days weekends and their airshow. These images on the Cod are during those more recent trips. If they had other subs / boats, those were before my time.

richardsaccount

Thanks for replying. Yes, the air show is very nice. Its lineage stems from the
Thompsom Air Races of long ago. Fred Crawford the CEO of Thompson Products started them.
You should stop by the next time that you folks are here to the Western Reserve History Center
in University Circle. Where the Thompson Auto Aviation Museum is located. Some interesting Planes
and cars to see. We also have here an author by the name of Les Roberts who is origanally from Chicago.
He came here and stayed. He has written a series of mystery novels of about a Cleveland detecive named Milam Jacovich. I once heard him on a local NPR show. He revered to Cleveland as Chicago Light. Amusing.

SteveInConverse Loc: South Texas

I have a roll of Ilford Delta that, if I recall correctly, is ASA 100. If I set my film speed to say 200 or 400 what kind of results could I expect? No images or just low contrast?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

You can have it push-processed to get the mid-tones and highlights to come out right but the shadows will be very dark or missing.

SteveInConverse Loc: South Texas

Ah ok. Thanks. Push processing is completely alien to me. I never even tried it when I was shooting film years ago.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

It increases the contrast but not the film speed.