Replacement for Kodak Technical Pan?

Discussion in 'Product Availability' started by roteague, Jul 24, 2005.

  1. roteague

    roteague Member

    Messages:
    6,671
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Kaneohe, Haw
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
  2. Tom Hoskinson

    Tom Hoskinson Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  3. Donald Qualls

    Donald Qualls Member

    Messages:
    1,845
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Location:
    North Caroli
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I don't see anything there suggesting Bluefire Police is an Efke film. Rather, Jon is saying that Maco TP64 is not the same as Efke 50.

    My understanding has been that Bluefire Police is Agfa Copex Rapid, the same emulsion (only in 16 mm or 35 mm roll form) as Gigabitfilm, but with a different developer recommendation to allow EI 80 with good tonality.
     
  4. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,671
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Gigabit is claimed to be a propietary emulsion, not Copex Rapid.
    I think Efke 25 can be an excellent substitue to TchPan.
     
  5. jandc

    jandc Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004

    Gigabit, our Copex Rapid and the Bluefire are all Copex microfilms. We used to carry Gigabit but dropped it because we could sell Copex and the superior Spur developer cheaper than the Gigabit kit. We also sell Kodak imagelink microfilm and Spur developer for the same purposes.

    For 99 percent of the shooting anyone is going to do and with the cost of the microfilms I would agree that a film like Efke 25 is the better choice.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 26, 2005
  6. edz

    edz Member

    Messages:
    685
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Munich, Germ
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    But not, I think, the same. Foy, if I recall correctly, sourced the film for his "Bluefire" from Tura (as Turapan microfilm) since Agfa did not want to sell to him in the small volumes he wanted. Ludwig and Schain/8x11film.com source their film from Agfa-Gevaert from fresh stocks of Copex-Rapid-AHU, Ludwig (Gigabit) has them "enhanced" with frame numbers and packaged in Southern Europe. Schain's packaging is done in Germany (as a hint, his current space is rented from Tura). Tura, I've heard, has a large stockpile of the older (long out of production) Copex emulusion and its very cheap--- but who knows for how long as Tura has filed for protection from their creditors. I have some of what I think is the same emulusion and its, for the application, not as good. For high contrast, however, its got an even higher resolution(!).

    How about 'cause the Gigabit kit did not work as well as Nanospeed. Gigabit had some quality problems, the developer turns bad very quickly and getting good results can be tricky--- why there was a lot of disappointment with the product. The Nanospeed developer, by contrast (one needs to recall that Schain and Ludwig were partners on the original Gigabit), has addressed many of these shortcommings and has a significantly larger tolerance to processing.


    A better choice for what? If its about making absurdly large enlargements using miniature (24x36mm and smaller) gauge films then there is nothing close to these microfilms. If its about fine grain and sharpeness then even TMAX-100 blasts the Efke-25 out of the water. The Efke-25 is NOT Agfapan-25. Agfapan-25 was dropped since (and I did like it and continue to use it in my MINOX) its obsolete. Microfilms perform better, T-grain films like TMax, Delta-100, Acros-100 are finer grained and offer many times the speed etc.
     
  7. jandc

    jandc Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    Ed,

    Putting aside the ax you are so pathetically trying to grind it must be hard on you being the keeper of all knowledge photographic. Never being wrong about anything must also be a tough thing to keep up. Congratulations, you're a true legend in your own mind.

    But something good did come of this, my first opportunity to use the ignore feature. Thanks.
     
  8. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,671
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think you are mistaken.
    Efke 25 is a wonderful film, fine grain, nice tonality, good sharpness.

    IMHO Tmax does not have the same qualities. Delta100 and Across while wonderful films they are do not have the same tonal range than EFKE 25.... to each his/her own though



     
  9. edz

    edz Member

    Messages:
    685
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Munich, Germ
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That's NOT the point nor the question (perhaps, at best, an answer to some other question): What is a replacement for Technical Pan?

    If its for the extended red? Nope. Here I'd point people to something like Kodak HawkEye. Excellent high resolution film with extended red sensitivity.

    If its for the resolution and sharpeness? That's where Copex comes in. Technical Pan is slightly smaller in grain but less sharp.

    If its for tonality? We talking about Technical Pan are we not?

    Technical Pan was a "technical" film for things like photo-micrography. It was based upon their "ancient" Solar Flare Patrol Film SO-392 and replaced also their high contrast copy materials. It was available in all kinds of formats INCLUDING glass plates!

    Kodak is not completely out of that business as their EM films are still available. Kodak Electron Image Film SO-163 and Electron Microscopy Film 4489 still have some advantages over the silicon sensors which have widely replaced film.

    Technical Pan was pretty much obsolete stuff. The photomicrography people have moved on and found better, the astrophotography people have moved over to a whole new generation of red sensitive digital capture chips and .... AND sales were sluggish.. about the only time it sold well in the past 10 years was upon the announcement of its EOL (End of Life)..
     
  10. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,038
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Edward C. Zimmermann

    Would you please reply to the points in Titrisol's post, instead of going off at a tangent.

    You state that EFKE 25 is less sharp and is grainier than Tmax100. I use both films and it's not the case.

    Yes I prefered AP25 (a few rolls left) and APX25 (20 or 30 rolls left) but the EFKE 25 is a superbly sharp extremely fine grain film.

    Ian

    Originally Posted by titrisol
    I think you are mistaken.
    Efke 25 is a wonderful film, fine grain, nice tonality, good sharpness.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 26, 2005
  11. edz

    edz Member

    Messages:
    685
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Munich, Germ
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Titrisol's comments were a tangent. The question is about Technical Pan and there is little about Efke25 that can be considered a replacement for any of the kinds of applications that demanded it.

    I think, if I recall correctly, Efke 25 gets just uder 120 lp/mm (1:1000) resolution. Kodak's TMax-100 is higher at 190 lp/mm or so. Its RMS is 8. Fuji Neopan 100 Acros is even finer grained with RMS of 7 (about the same as Agfa APX-25)! Technical Pan was 5 and Copex-Rapid-AHU is 6. Agfa Copex at 1:1000 can deliver 600 lp/mm.

    We are talking, I guess, about pictorial applications and there TMax-100 can deliver around 60-70 lp/mm compared to around 100 for Agfa Copex and Technical Pan. Agfa APX-25 delivered around 80 lp/mm. Efke 25 is roughly en-par with TMax but at less than 1/4 its E.I and with a high contrast that is much harder to tame. Handled well one can get good results from Efke-25 but the effort is nearly as much as with high resolution microfilms for a fraction of the returns........
     
  12. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,038
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Perhaps it's time you rejoined the real world.

    Your answer is not backed by any valid testing. In 50+ years Adox (EFKE) Kb14 (Din) 25 (ISO) has been the sharpest and finest grain conventional film available. Yes AP25 & APX25 were better coated and more consistent but they've gone.

    Now cut the crap this forum is really only about pictorial aplications. Sure I've used Tech Pan for extremely critical medium to high contrast copying work and there's no better film.

    All I can say is your showing your ignorance, which I wish you'd keep to yorself.

    Ian
     
  13. Alan Johnson

    Alan Johnson Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,514
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Ian,go to fotokemika.com then efke.The claimed resolution of the Efke 25 is 115 lpm.I have used both Efke 25 and Gigabit and while the Efke has a very fine grain IMO the resolution of Gigabit at 11x enlargement is clearly higher in the real world.
     
  14. noseoil

    noseoil Member

    Messages:
    2,898
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yawn.
     
  15. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,038
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well said.

     
  16. Tom Hoskinson

    Tom Hoskinson Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I agree.
     
  17. Alan Johnson

    Alan Johnson Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,514
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Using microfilm and buying a high resolution lens was going to be a project.Is it not such a good idea then?
     
  18. noseoil

    noseoil Member

    Messages:
    2,898
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Alan, nothing wrong with your plan. Be aware that the weak link will most likely be the printing paper anyway. All of this talk about lpmm, sharpness, acuity, the ultimate film and developer combination is just words and so much B.S. at this point.

    What do you want to accomplish? What do you need this combination for and what will you take pictures of which require this combination? How big will the enlargement ratio end up being, 1:4 or 1:40? Should a larger format be used to accomplish this effect with a coarser film rather than a finer film? Will you use rodinal for edge effects or pyrocat and minimal agitation?

    Sorry I can't give you a history lesson, but I just take pictures. Personally, I like Efke 25 very much. It is sharp and has a very contrasty look to it. I've used it for portraits which have been cropped out of 35mm and enlarged to 8x10 without visible grain. This was with PMK pyro. It is inexpensive, orthopanchromatic, unforgiving as Velvia and wonderful in the right lighting. Get it wrong and it will slap you with your mistakes. Pick a film, work with it for a year and see what you think. Wish I had better advice, but I hope you will give it a try. tim

    Efke 25 at asa 12 (and a tripod, usually)
    Presoak film 2 minutes for best and most even development
    PMK pyro developer 1:2:100 mixed with distilled water!
    Agitate for 30 seconds to 1 minute (depends on contrast, 35mm), then
    Try for 7:00 at 70f with 15 second agitation cycles and see what you get
     
  19. Alan Johnson

    Alan Johnson Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,514
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Alan Johnson

    Noseoil,
    I like to shoot seascapes,landscapes,walk a long way so use lighter 35mm but want it to look like 645 (huh) at 11x14. I may try Copex or Imagelink in Spur developer but the Efke 25 sounds better than I knew. Tonality, I remember that. Iwill try some as well. Thanks for the advice.
     
  20. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,671
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Don't forget to buy a very good enlarging lens. That may become your weakest link :wink:

     
  21. Gerald Koch

    Gerald Koch Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I thought that I would mention that Claire Senft is trying to get enough people together to buy a case (20 - 100 ft rolls) of Kodak Imagelink HQ film. The price is $12.06 per roll + shipping. Here's your chance to try out a replacement for Tech Pan. You can contact her directly or search on Imagelink.
     
  22. Peter De Smidt

    Peter De Smidt Member

    Messages:
    1,064
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Fond du Lac,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've been away for awhile and am catching up. I'm surprised and disappointed in how people who disagree with Mr. Zimmermann have behaved here. I don't know him personally, but we've been on some of the same forums over the years. He's always struck me as knowledgable and reasonable, and I don't remember a time that he posted mis-information. Moreover, in this thread he cited pretty good reasons for his statements, much of it manufacturers's own data. Sure he may be mistaken, but no one on the other side has presented any useful evidence whatsoever. And since this thread is about a replacement for Technical Pan, talking about resolution, fine grain, and sprectral response are perfectly in order. If some of you don't want to talk about it, why not get some sleep. Yawning isn't polite.

    Peter De Smidt
     
  23. Tom Hoskinson

    Tom Hoskinson Member

    Messages:
    3,879
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Neither is endless repetition of a one-note song.
     
  24. Peter De Smidt

    Peter De Smidt Member

    Messages:
    1,064
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Fond du Lac,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What "one note song" would that be?

    Peter De Smidt