Ilford Pan F-Plus at 50asa

[kenneth]

Used to get this film processed by Ilford but now starting to do my own. I used Ilfosol.3 1-14 with regular inversion for 6 mins. Ilford recommend this or 1-9 for 4 mins which seemed too short and could lead to uneven development or 1-14 for 6 mins as I did. The negs look OK but a touch pale, however I haven't printed any as yet. Comments very welcome thank you

[stunsworth]

The digital truth site gives a time of 4.5 minutes, which is still rather short. An alternative would be to switch to D76 or Xtol which give longer development times. The data on digital truth for Pan F is here...

Digitaltruth Photo: The Massive Dev Chart

[kenneth]

Originally Posted by stunsworth

The digital truth site gives a time of 4.5 minutes, which is still rather short. An alternative would be to switch to D76 or Xtol which give longer development times. The data on digital truth for Pan F is here...

Digitaltruth Photo: The Massive Dev Chart

Thank you Steve I will give it a look. I guess having a quantity of Ilfosol.3 I was trying to use it as a universal developer when maybe there is no such thing. The other film stock I use regularly is Kodak Tri-X 400 which seems to work well with Ilfosol.3.

Steve, this may sound like a numb afterthought but would the results have more definition if I had given the same dilution, say 9 mins?

[Neil Purling]

What pleases you may not be to my taste, and I admit I do not shoot much Pan F.
Given that you have two times for Pan F @ 50 ASA that differ by 30% you should try shooting a strip of images, a bracketed series repeated several times.
When it comes to developing you should cut the film into two and develope one strip for 6 min, the other for 4.5. You'd then have something better to judge from and see what gives a decent print.

I don't use Ilfosol, I use R09 (old Rodinal) for the slow & medium speed stuff.
I like that because the dilutions can be 1:25, 1:50 or even 1:100 for a short roll.
This is my personal taste you understand. I am not trying to 'diss' what you are doing.
It may take more experimentation before you get a result you are really pleased with.

I am going through the same process with Fomapan 200 and 400 in Ilfotec LC29.
With experimentation we aim to reach a point at which we can tell what times suit the film and we can be happy in using them in the knowledge that valuable images are going to develope in a predictable manner. It may be that a cut of 10% for a film shot in sunny conditions might be advisable.

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by kenneth

Steve, this may sound like a numb afterthought but would the results have more definition if I had given the same dilution, say 9 mins?

You'd have had denser, more contrasty negatives.

[Rolo]

I've been using PanF in bright sunshine developed in Rodinal.

Excellent negs finally! See the results in the People Photo Forum. I'll explain my process if there's any interest.

Rolo

[christer]

The best and quickest way to establish correct exposure index and development time in one go is to make a series a shots of a non reflective uniformly colored surface and measure the resulting densities. There should be nine exposures, starting with one being four stops underexposed, and then increasing the exposure by one stop until you reach four stops overexposure. If you can't measure the densities, send the negatives to me and I will measure for you and give you my verdict on your exposure index and development time.

But why Pan-F when there is Delta 100 and Tmx 100?

[kenneth]

Originally Posted by christer

The best and quickest way to establish correct exposure index and development time in one go is to make a series a shots of a non reflective uniformly colored surface and measure the resulting densities. There should be nine exposures, starting with one being four stops underexposed, and then increasing the exposure by one stop until you reach four stops overexposure. If you can't measure the densities, send the negatives to me and I will measure for you and give you my verdict on your exposure index and development time.

But why Pan-F when there is Delta 100 and Tmx 100?

But why Pan-F when there is Delta 100 and Tmx 100?[/quote]

I guess I used to use it many years ago and I found it was still available when I returned to using B&W. I do also quite like the sort of traditional look it has and it is completely different to Kodak Tri-X 400 which is the other film I use.

Thank you for your kind offer by the way, I may take you up on that

[Double Negative]

I love PanF+ and use it typically with Xtol 1:1 for 7.75m @ 68F. Both 135 and 120.

[wls.shanghai]

Originally Posted by kenneth

Used to get this film processed by Ilford but now starting to do my own. I used Ilfosol.3 1-14 with regular inversion for 6 mins. Ilford recommend this or 1-9 for 4 mins which seemed too short and could lead to uneven development or 1-14 for 6 mins as I did. The negs look OK but a touch pale, however I haven't printed any as yet. Comments very welcome thank you

ILFORD Pan F plus processed with Ilfosol

is like a Porsche with VW Polo tyres

Pan F plus with Ilford ID11 is the DreamTeam

or Pan F plus (25 ASA) and Ilford Perceptol

wls

[kully]

Pan F at EI50, for me comes out lovely in Rodinal 1:50, 20C and 11 minutes with 10 seconds of gentle swirling agitation every 10 seconds (using the swirl stick that comes with Patterson tanks).

[thomasw_]

Pan F+ at 50 in Afga Rodinal 1:50 11'; invert slowly 3x first min, 1x @ 3', 5', 7', 9'. Good tonality and contrast.

[wls.shanghai]

Originally Posted by wls.shanghai

ILFORD Pan F plus processed with Ilfosol

is like a Porsche with VW Polo tyres

Pan F plus with Ilford ID11 is the DreamTeam

or Pan F plus (25 ASA) and Ilford Perceptol

wls

.....just a sample for inspection

Pan F plus and Ilford ID11

Leica R7 and Summicron 2/35

wls

btw: no problem for a print 60x90 cm