For many films in this series of reviews, it’s the first time I’ve tested them to this extreme. But for Ilford Ortho+, I have already done extensive stress testing on the film stock. I first shot this film in sheet film format and found that there is already a listed D-76 time with no listed speed. That resulted in one of my favourite waterfall photos, where I shot the film at ASA-6 and got some lovely results with a large-format camera on a bright day. I even repeated this process, exposing it between ASA-25 and ASA-6, and got some excellent results. So, going into this review with knowledge of the film’s range and having developed with Diafine before, I have high hopes for these results.
Film Specs
Manufacturer: Harman Technologies
Name: Ilford Ortho+ (Ilford Ortho Copy Plus)
Type: Orthochromatic B&W
Film Base: Acetate
Film Speed: ASA-80 (Daylight)/ASA-40 (Tungsten)
Formats Available: 135, 120, Sheets
While most films have been straightforward in setting the benchmark EI because most have a listed box speed, the thing is that, like Eastman Double-X, Ilford Ortho+ has two listed box speeds depending on the light source, ASA-80 for daylight and ASA-40 for tungsten. Since I’m shooting the roll in daylight, I went with ASA-80 for my benchmark box speed, then shooting it between -2 and +2 stops, which translates to ASA-20 to ASA-320. There is only a single time listed on the MDC for Ortho+ and Diafine 3.5+3.5 rating the film at ASA-160. But I wanted to develop it at the same time as last month’s roll, so I went with a straight 3+3 time; thirty seconds wouldn’t be missed, right? I used my Nikon F5 with the 28mm f/2.8 lens and no filters attached. I set the aperture to f/11, mounted the camera on a tripod, and used a remote release to trigger each shot, adjusting the EV during the shoot.
I went into this review expecting Ortho+ to perform well. As mentioned in the introduction, I’ve tested this, and it’s running very slowly. And it has done well in the past with under-exposure and developed in Diafine. Once I pulled the negatives from the tank, I realised the results were not exactly what I expected. I was expecting something more consistent across all five frames. There seemed to be a wider range between the stops than I expected, and certainly not as clean as I had hoped. Not terrible, but not the best either. I think that thirty seconds might have helped in some cases. I did get some interesting results in the under-exposed frames, while the over-exposed frames blew out quickly.
While the performance was disappointing, there are some interesting images in this review. As a film stock, Ortho+ is an acquired taste, but I like it: fine grain, orthochromatic (doesn’t see reds), and sharp. Plus, it has a wide latitude, kind of. Now the over-exposed frames fall flat, everything is lost, your highlights are blown out, and the shadows are just gone and not in a good way. The real standout comes with the frames exposed at ASA-80 and the two underexposed frames. But in a few cases, the two-stop under-exposure gets this deep, rich contrast. I hate to say it, cinematic. As for grain and sharpness, these are exactly what I expected with the film stock.
Alright, this is neither a good nor a bad review of Ortho+; it’s less a reflection on the film and more on Diafine. With the extra 30 seconds added, the underexposed and box speed results would be far better. But it would make the overexposed ones even worse than they already are. Use Diafine for under-exposure, but if you’re planning on over-exposing, use Ortho+ with D-76 at 1+1 for 11 minutes. I tested that combination and got the stuff down to ASA-6 with good results. So while thing one fell a little flat, at least it might give me something if I want something a little more moody with a film I wouldn’t expect to achieve.