JandC 400

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by kjsphoto, Dec 31, 2004.

  1. kjsphoto

    kjsphoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,322
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    I recently bought some JandC 400 and was told that I need to rate it at 200 and only rate it at 400 for light at night.

    Does anyone have experience with this film? I really want to shoot this film but do not know what to rate it at now.

    Thanks,

    Kev
     
  2. johnnywalker

    johnnywalker Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,260
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2002
    Location:
    British Colu
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I haven't tried the film, but I did a lot of looking at 400 films before ordering mine (I got Arista.Edu 400, which I understand is the same film as the J&C Classic 400 and the Fortepan 400) and I never ran across that statement about the film. Mine hasn't arrived yet, but I'll also be interested the replies you get.

    Happy New Year,
     
  3. lee

    lee Member

    Messages:
    2,913
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Worth T
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    rate it at EI 200 for daytime light and 400 for flash shoot a little and see if the shadow detail is good for you if it is not and there is not enough then re-rate it say at 100 and shoot a few sheets and see how that works. Conversely if too much shadow detail for you rate it at 400 and shoot a few shots and see how that works somewhere you will find the proper EI

    lee\c
     
  4. kjsphoto

    kjsphoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,322
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    Do you keep the development time the same for all different ISO you rate it or adjust?

    I have heard a lot of good things about the film but was unaware of the shadow detail issue you mentioned. What are the differnt things to look for with this film? Also, what is a good developer for it?

    HC-110, Rodinal, TMAX, PyrocatHD?

    Thanks,

    Kev
     
  5. lee

    lee Member

    Messages:
    2,913
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Location:
    Fort Worth T
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    kev,

    I would keep the development the same for the initial tests. You need to make some tests to see if you like how the film prints as you shot it and as you developed it. Exposure controls the shadow detail and development controls the highlights. If you find that one or the other or both don't meet your tastes you may change one or the other or both. Lowering the EI on the meter will give you more exposure and increase the shadow detail conversely raising the EI will give less shadow detail. The same theory works with the developer except it does its work on the highlights. If you find that the highlights are lacking in detail you may choose to reduce the amount of time in the developer. If you find that the film is lacking in overall contrast you might want to increase the development time. No one can tell you what will work for your cameras your processes or your tastes. It is all up to you and how you meter the scene. Feel free to experiment. Any written instructions are simply put there as a guide line and a starting point. I don't quite understand what you want when you say "What are the different things I should look for." This is just old technology film and as such it has a toe and a shoulder. As I see it, it is just film. So I can say with some certainty, Your Mileage May Vary.

    Lots of people say that this film will build contrast up to a certain point then it quits. Many that need or want contraster negatives might choose a film like EFKE or TMY. These films have a straighter line and the highlights seem not to shoulder off.

    As to developers to use with this film, any of the developers should work just fine. I have some experience with Pyrocat-HD and PMK and HC110. Some testing will have to be done to make it work for you and your system. I cannot emphasize this enough. It is your work and vision, use it to your advantage.
     
  6. Dr.Kollig

    Dr.Kollig Member

    Messages:
    107
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Location:
    Rhine valley
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I started using this film a few years ago, by that time it was only available as Forte 400 not as Classic Pan 400, could not get a single film but either 10 or 30 m roll at the same price, so started out with 30 m....
    THe film has a high sensitivity for red light, so it is around 320-400 in articial light, but only 200-250 ASA in normal daylight, this was marked in the Forte instructions which came with the film. So develop that film at the given times for first trials but set film speed to 200-250 ASA - as recommended.
    For 35 mm film I would recommend Calbe A 49 or for grainny results Forte FMH 4175 with 800-1000 ASA.
    Unlike Tri-X and HP5+ Forte 400 does not push well to 1600.

    Kind regards,

    Wolfram
     
  7. chrisg

    chrisg Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    I've done some 4x5 test shots with J&C 400. EI 200 looks about right to me. For comparison, I rate HP5 at 400. (I picked up the J&C 400 as an alternative to HP5, which is my primary film.) Those EIs are for development with DDX.

    Chris
     
  8. Jeremy

    Jeremy Member

    Messages:
    2,767
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Location:
    Denton, TX
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    For palladium contact printing in 5x7 size developed in pyrocat HD 2:2:100 I rate this film at 640.
     
  9. kjsphoto

    kjsphoto Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,322
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    What is DDX?


    Kev
     
  10. djklmnop

    djklmnop Member

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Just to add to this discussion.. I tried EI testing last night with Rodinal 1:50. The film seems to be exhausting the developer much too quickly. For Zone VIII (75F), at 9 minutes the density fell short at .97.. I increased time for second trial to 11 minutes.. density came out to 1.0. Increased once again to 13.5 min!!!! yet density still 1.07. I know for a fact that I didn't do anything wrong, since Zone I's density increased accordingly.

    I will be redoing my test this week with 1:25 dilution this time. Hopefully with better luck.

    Andy
     
  11. Tom Hoskinson

    Tom Hoskinson Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Check out Francesco's post in another APUG thread: http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11396&page=3

    My own experience with J&C Classic 400 developed in Pyrocat HD echos Francesco's. In other words, it is an excellent film/developer combination - especially with semi-stand agitation.
     
  12. chrisg

    chrisg Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Ilford DD-X.

    Label recommends 1+4 but I like it 1+9. Gives maybe half a stop additional speed over D-76, which I use 1+2.

    Chris
     
  13. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,671
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ilfotec DDX is a liquid developer from Ilford. IMHO similar to Microphen.

    Very low grain, nice pucshing ability.
     
  14. jmailand

    jmailand Member

    Messages:
    151
    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Location:
    Belmont Mich
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ilfotec DD-X is a Ilford developer sold in liquid form. I think that what's ddx must stand for.
     
  15. Tom Hoskinson

    Tom Hoskinson Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    These may be the two D’s in Ilfotec DD-X:
    Diethylene Glycol
    Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid – Na5

    As a previous post indicated, Ilfotec DD-X produces results that are similar to those produced by Ilford Microphen, based on Ilford’s descriptive literature and the DD-X Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS).

    See the Ilfotec DD-X MSDS:
    http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/msds/ilford/b&w/DD-X.PDF
     
  16. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,671
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The original Ilfotec DD stands for Dip and Dunk.

    Then the Ilford guys realized they could tweak it for hand processing and called it DDX
     
  17. Rolleijoe

    Rolleijoe Member

    Messages:
    530
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    S.E. Texas
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    ARISTA EDU/Fortepan NOT Same as Classicpan (from Berlin)

    I think there may be some confusion. Arista EDU IS FOrtepan, but NOT "J&C Classic". This is a film they bring in from Berlin Germany, which is called "Classicpan", and comes in a variety of speeds. I'm hoping to get some Berlin REaL variety over, and do some tests. I've goe some friends in the Fatherland, will ask for a pickup.

    Rolleijoe
     
  18. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,980
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    J&C Classic, Classicpan, and Arista.EDU are all rebranded Fortepan. John from J&C has posted this here before, and I've discussed it in e-mail with Mirko from fotoimpex.de.
     
  19. jandc

    jandc Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    This is correct.
     
  20. Doug Bennett

    Doug Bennett Member

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2003
    Location:
    Huntsville,
    John,

    When do you expect to have Classic 400 in 120 format back in stock?
     
  21. Rolleijoe

    Rolleijoe Member

    Messages:
    530
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    S.E. Texas
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    When I 1st used DDX on HP5+ (& Tri-X 320) 4x5, I was very disappointed in how low contrast the HP turned out to be. I've bought some of the Forte 200 in 4x5 (packaged as "Arista EDU") but haven't finished shooting up the Tri-X Pro I've got loaded.

    I've got all my development times/films down to the same time/temp whether I use HC-110, Rodinal or Studional. So I'll just stick with these. Unless the Forte (which I've shot years ago in 120 with great results) is still the same as it was.

    Rolleijoe