Ilford XP2 Super - The Most Versatile Film Stock?

Ilford XP2 Super is a sharp, fast, versatile black and white film with a twist - it gets the C41 treatment. That's right, this B&W stock gets developed in color chemicals. But is it worth the price?
Socials: @lukeisafinename

[@oceangrunge7139]

The ISO setting is only to tell your internal lightmeter how to interpret the amount of light it is receiving. It does literally nothing else. You can have your ISO setting completely off, and meter with an external meter, and as long as you dial in the settings your external meter is telling you to dial in, you will get a properly exposed image. Ilford's suggestion that it can be shot at different ISOs means you meter at different ISOs and actually dial those settings in (as you did with the trash can) - you will technically be over or underexposing accordingly, but what Ilford is saying is that an over or underexposed image on XP2 will still look good. I have heard also (s/o to Steve O'Nions), that overexposing XP2 actually results in finer grain, because of how the particles on the film behave. Also, to be pendatic (and I sincerely hope this comment does not come off as pointed; that is not my intent, I am just hoping to share the knowledge I have had the good fortune to have picked up over the years :)), pushing and pulling technically refers to the development part of the process, not the shooting part. When you shoot XP2 at ISO 800, you are technically underexposing the film. You can then push in the development (synomous with letting it develop for longer) to bring what little light was captured up to a usable level. Likewise, when you shoot it at 50, you are technically overexposing, and you pull in development (i.e. don't let it develop for as long as it would normally) so that the highlights don't have enough time to end up getting overblown. You therefore cannot push or pull within a single roll (unless you cut it and develop the strips separately) - but you can (as you did) over and underexpose within a single roll.

[@eakishway]

Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation. IMHO this comment and the trash can photos under different exposure in the videos are the most helpful part.

[@mnoliberal7335]

Looks like my favorite parking garage here in Orlando, Florida. I use XP-2 regularly. The sharpness & grain is so fine that enlargements are no problem. You can develop it using B&W developers, which means the difference in appearance depending on which you use, so not using up your color chemistry.

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

Meter for your highlights and then you'll see the contrast. Even Hp5 can be "flat" if you're getting too much detail in the shadows. Meter for highlights and the black will pop, every time. One great thing about neutral films, I find, if I'm doing product photography or something artistic other than street photography. You have more manipulation leeway with a relatively flat image.

[@tremorist]

I shot a lot on Super 8 before the prices for a cartridge and processing went through the roof. What I liked about the Tri-X was that you could develop it as negative as well as positive. Thanks for the video.

[@lukeisafinename]

Negative or positive development? I'll have to look into that because that's super interesting!

[@averywagg1839]

I have my first roll in the camera right now. I suspect that your right about it shooting flat. Even Ilford’s published exposure graph on this film suggests it as well. Thanks for putting this review out here..

[@ogaffney]

I’m 1/4 of the way thru this video and you’re now my favorite analog dude in the game, hahaha.

[@TokyoGritandGrain]

GREAT seeing this. I've shot a number or rolls of XP2 and look forward to making a video about it all and your video really helps. I have actually get the feeling that people who develop at home don't use this film. I'm using Kodak D-76 to dev my BW film and the XP2 turns out f'n amazing. What are you using to develop this film stock? Thx. Good vid.

[@lukeisafinename]

My normal go-to b&w developer is Ilfosol 3, but for this one I used standard C41 processing. It blew my mind seeing color and b&w negatives come out of the same tank!

[@danielzalka6361]

Cool vid. Thanks pal!

[@thomaspopple2291]

Big issue with this video. The part about changing ISO mid roll. You said you changed the iso setting on your camera but did not change anything else. Well of course there is not going to be a difference. Shutter speed and aperture is what controls the amount of light, not iso. What the maker of this film is really saying is that you can overexpose and underexpose the film on the same roll and still get good results. How can you be making photography videos without knowing what iso is and does?

[@ChicagoRob2]

Beautiful tonality

[@ChimasRegal72]

Hey dude :) great work as always. I really enjoy your work, to a point that I'm looking into my first camera (always loved photography, but never had the time to get into it). I was wondering would you be interested in making a video about developing film? Chemicals you use, the whole process would be great :D Anyways, keep it up, looking forward to more Fridays

[@lukeisafinename]

Thanks man, glad you're enjoying the channel! I do want to cover how to develop at home, but I'm not sure when that'll be. In the meantime, I highly recommend Matt Day's videos on the topic - he and Ted Forbes at The Art of Photography taught me everything I needed to get started

[@jdavera1016]

I haven't had the chance to shoot XP2 yet, but I have shot a lot of Kodak BW400CN, and got good results with that. But now that they don't make it anymore, I'm interested in giving the Ilford a try.

[@letmebereal]

I like the flat look.

[@davefaulkner6302]

BTW this is an Ilford film and like other Ilford films you can buy in 100 ft. lengths. B&H sells it for about $90, so not there's no excuse not to shoot it at about ($90/18) $5 / roll.

[@lrochfort]

I'm sure by being able to change your ISO mid-roll they're just intimating at the wide exposure latitude afforded by this being a C-41 process film. Changing the ISO on your camera is just altering one of the three input variables to the meter; aperture and shutter are the only two variables that you can change. I'm increasingly of the opinion that there's very little to be gained from push or pulling when processing, either.

[@s_t_r_a_y_e_d]

800 and 1600 look really good wtf

[@SilntObsvr]

More versatile even than its incredible latitude -- unique among C-41 films, XP2 Super is virtually the same density, contrast, and image quality when processed in black and white chemistry as in the standard C-41, and if you put it in E-6 process, you'll get (slightly pink) black and white slides. That's right, one film, *three* processes, very good to exceptional results in all three. Oh, and you can get XP2 Super in 100 foot bulk rolls, too.

[@dmytrokalnytskyy6931]

thanks!

[@gatsbye53]

Did you ever go back and pick up a 100 foot roll?

[@davefaulkner6302]

If you "Meter for your highlights" (I assume you mean "from your highlights") then you're underexposing the film radically. The way to think about this film is that its a color negative with black dye blooms. Ordinary color negative file has an incredible dynamic range if you take into account all color channels. If you could use the dynamic range of all the colors you would have a huge range to play with, and that's what seems to be XP2's characteristic. The black blooms don't look quite like the grains of B&W, and so the different look of the prints. However, like C41 Color negative films, over and under exposing causes shifts in the shape of the frequency response curve, so you can get contrasty or not looks depending on where you are in the dynamic range.

[@lukeisafinename]

That makes a lot of sense! Looking forward to the next time XP2 and I cross paths