kenneth Posted June 15, 2009 Share #1 Posted June 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Hi kenneth, Take a look here Ilford Pan F-Plus at 50asa. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted June 15, 2009 Share #2 Posted June 15, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted June 16, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted June 16, 2009 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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Purling Posted June 16, 2009 Share #4 Posted June 16, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 16, 2009 Share #5 Posted June 16, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted June 16, 2009 Share #6 Posted June 16, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted June 16, 2009 Share #7 Posted June 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted June 17, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted June 17, 2009 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? 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted June 27, 2009 Share #9 Posted June 27, 2009 I love PanF+ and use it typically with Xtol 1:1 for 7.75m @ 68F. Both 135 and 120. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wls.shanghai Posted June 27, 2009 Share #10 Posted June 27, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kully Posted July 1, 2009 Share #11 Posted July 1, 2009 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). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasw_ Posted July 1, 2009 Share #12 Posted July 1, 2009 Pan F+ at 50 in Afga Rodinal 1:50 11'; invert slowly 3x first min, 1x @ 3', 5', 7', 9'. Good tonality and contrast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wls.shanghai Posted July 1, 2009 Share #13 Posted July 1, 2009 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 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/88082-ilford-pan-f-plus-at-50asa/?do=findComment&comment=950002'>More sharing options...
Karreaux Posted April 2, 2010 Share #14 Posted April 2, 2010 Sorry for picking up this thread, but i've got a dark room question... Normally i shoot with Tri-X400 and develop with D76 1:1. The first minute I rotate the tank continue. After that, every 30sec I rotate another 2 times (left-right). Well, i've just picked up some rolls of PanF Plus. They say: "Agitation should be continuous for the first 10seconds , then 10 seconds every minute" What should I do, because 10 seconds is a lot less then one minute that i'm use to do with Tri-x? How are you guys doing it ? Thanks a lot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 2, 2010 Share #15 Posted April 2, 2010 I agitate for 10 seconds every minute, regardless of the film or the instructions. I also rate Pan F+ at 32, and develop for about 10-15% shorter time than recommended Works fine for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted April 2, 2010 Share #16 Posted April 2, 2010 Sorry for picking up this thread, but i've got a dark room question... Normally i shoot with Tri-X400 and develop with D76 1:1. The first minute I rotate the tank continue. After that, every 30sec I rotate another 2 times (left-right). Well, i've just picked up some rolls of PanF Plus. They say: "Agitation should be continuous for the first 10seconds , then 10 seconds every minute" What should I do, because 10 seconds is a lot less then one minute that i'm use to do with Tri-x? How are you guys doing it ? Thanks a lot So long as you don't get turbulence streamers from the sprocket holes you will be ok. D76 at 1:1 is pretty strong as a silver solvent and both will slow the PanF, and reduce grain size, 1:3 is probably better for acutance, the PanF is pretty fine grain already, note Tri-X may need the solvent action. D76 is a fine grain formula... But grain and acutance are subjective things - in how they are (can be) interpreted. I embed the Ilford data sheet http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2006216122447.pdf but note if you are scanning you will have PS sliders to adjust contrast, only the toe is critical for shadow detail, and the shadow detail is not that dependent on dev time - if you have underexposed, it just wont be there. The dev times depended on what sort of enlarger you plan on using - to keep the normal negatives on normal grade silver gelatin paper/RC. However the subject is very contrasty then you may have to worry about high lights burning and may need to use a softer working developer or reduce the dev time as pervious post. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted April 2, 2010 Share #17 Posted April 2, 2010 I agitate for 10 seconds every minute, regardless of the film or the instructions. ............. Works fine for me. Works fine for me too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Lord Posted April 2, 2010 Share #18 Posted April 2, 2010 Pan F+ at 50 in Afga Rodinal 1:50 11'; invert slowly 3x first min, 1x @ 3', 5', 7', 9'. Good tonality and contrast. That is a great image and sums up why I still use film. I like pan F as it can give a really 1960's look to a shot if you want it to, not that this particualr image does that, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karreaux Posted April 3, 2010 Share #19 Posted April 3, 2010 So long as you don't get turbulence streamers from the sprocket holes you will be ok. D76 at 1:1 is pretty strong as a silver solvent and both will slow the PanF, and reduce grain size, 1:3 is probably better for acutance, the PanF is pretty fine grain already, note Tri-X may need the solvent action. D76 is a fine grain formula... But grain and acutance are subjective things - in how they are (can be) interpreted. I embed the Ilford data sheet http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2006216122447.pdf but note if you are scanning you will have PS sliders to adjust contrast, only the toe is critical for shadow detail, and the shadow detail is not that dependent on dev time - if you have underexposed, it just wont be there. The dev times depended on what sort of enlarger you plan on using - to keep the normal negatives on normal grade silver gelatin paper/RC. However the subject is very contrasty then you may have to worry about high lights burning and may need to use a softer working developer or reduce the dev time as pervious post. Noel So, D76 1:1 is good with Tri-X but not with Pan-F+ and its better to use it 1:3 because it is too 'strong', right? Under normal light conditions and normal ASA50 development, what time do you use (dependent temperature) with D76 1:3 and how do you agitate ? Just to have an idea... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest XXXX Posted April 3, 2010 Share #20 Posted April 3, 2010 So, D76 1:1 is good with Tri-X but not with Pan-F+ and its better to use it 1:3 because it is too 'strong', right?... Pan F in ID11 1+1 is fine (for me ) Lots of people say, D76 an ID11 is, more or less, the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.