The worlds worst film

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Donald Miller, Jan 13, 2004.

  1. Donald Miller

    Donald Miller Member

    Messages:
    6,242
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I spent the day processing film from my trip northwest and back. Since I had some Bergger BPF 200 left over from awhile back I thought that I would use it up. If this isn't the worlds worst film it has to be a close second. This stuff will not build density. I shot it at 100 and processed in Pyrocat 2-2-100 (these are 4X5 negatives for enlarging) and I still can not build any density range with it. God if I had anymore left over I would pay someone to take it off my hands. Never, and I mean never again!!!!
     
  2. Thomassauerwein

    Thomassauerwein Member

    Messages:
    1,627
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Don, I still have 30+ rolls of Ilford 50 speed 120 that I would'nt give to an enemy. Not having used your problem film I have no comparison but I certainley understand your frustration.
     
  3. Black Dog

    Black Dog Member

    Messages:
    3,238
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Location:
    Eight miles high
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Pan F could be notorious for picking up marks in processing-nice tonality though. I've used BPF 200 in PMK/ metol 2 bath and it's lovely. Maybe your PCat was a bit off?
     
  4. MikeK

    MikeK Member

    Messages:
    557
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2003
    Location:
    Walnut Creek
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    The worst I have ever used is Shanghai GP3 100. Sent to me by a buddy working in China. The emulsion has bits of crud embedded and the quality no matter what developer I used was really bad. Second in this category is another Chinese film called SHD-100, little better but not much.

    - Mike
     
  5. Donald Miller

    Donald Miller Member

    Messages:
    6,242
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I thought that too but I developed some Classic 200 in the same developer and had no problems. Bergger may work for normal contrast scenes but for scenes that require expansion it really sucks big time. Normally a film would be developed at 1-1-100 for enlarging...I was developing at the mixture that would be used for contact printing on Azo and it wouldn't get to a decent negative for enlarging. For a negative that requires expansion or a higher density range, my experience is that it doesn't come close.
     
  6. David Vickery

    David Vickery Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Central Texa
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    I've been using BPF 200 for at least a year now and have had no problems building density with it. In fact, you could study the Sun with some of my negatives. I did try some of that Pyrocat HD with an arista film and had no shadow density at all.**** After looking through my notes I have realized that it was not pyrocat hd that I tried. It was something else with Pyrocat.
     
  7. bjorke

    bjorke Member

    Messages:
    2,032
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Location:
    SF & Surroun
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Embedded crud notwithstanding, surely Max Gold 200....
     
  8. Grady O

    Grady O Member

    Messages:
    113
    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Location:
    Mass, USA
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Kodak Tmax 400 is pretty nasty.
     
  9. glbeas

    glbeas Member

    Messages:
    3,307
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2002
    Location:
    Roswell, Ga.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    So what are you going to do with them? Sounds like something I'd have fun playing with.
     
  10. noblebeast

    noblebeast Member

    Messages:
    555
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hmm...

    I've never heard of any of these other entries, but I always thought "Endless Love" was the worlds worst film. :whistle:
     
  11. Thomassauerwein

    Thomassauerwein Member

    Messages:
    1,627
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    Shooter:
    Large Format

    Well, I don't consider you my enemy. It's in the fridge I just keep, in the back of my mind thinking someday I'll try to figure the film out. The film has a powdery charchol look to it once printed it's a unique look that could be interesting with the right subject matter, but it's several years old now and not being wine I'm guessing I will probably toss it. Every time I do want to experiment I get flashbacks to all the frustration and lost images this horrible film caused.
     
  12. glbeas

    glbeas Member

    Messages:
    3,307
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2002
    Location:
    Roswell, Ga.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well, being a fine grained slow film it will probably last like Azo. I would think a POTA developer or technidol or maybe stand development would bring out the best in the film. I've used it and got pretty clear shadows, so it needs more exposure and less development that I was treating it to. I was seriously impressed by the detail and fineness of the grain though and would love to play with more. Think you would want to part with it?
     
  13. mikepry

    mikepry Subscriber

    Messages:
    413
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Location:
    Salem, Wi (B
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Not to mention the edges on BPF 200 are rougher than my wifes nail file. It's almost like they use a pizza cutter to cut it. I e-mailed the rep to ask what gives twice and never even got a reply. I gave up on it.
     
  14. Paddy

    Paddy Member

    Messages:
    338
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Location:
    Vancouver, B
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've just finished completing development/density testing on ClassicPan 200 (aka BPF 200), using HC-110 Dil H (1 stock:15 water), and PMK 1:2:100.

    I had no problem getting excellant densities in either soup, although my E.I.'s are 20 and 25 respectively. That's fine by me.

    I live in Canada, and thought that J&C had the cheapest price on this film ($11.99 U.S. per 25 sheet 4x5),...well they do, in the States. But in Toronto, Eight Elm Photo/Video sell the same film packaged as FortePan 200 & 400 for $21.00 CDN per 25 sheet box. (4x5) This saves me even more money, as it cuts out the Customs/Duty charges at the border.

    I agree that the film is a little rough around the edges,...maybe that's why they go to so much trouble with the packaging. It doesn't present any problems for me, because I develop either one sheet at a time, or multiples by using the six sheet tray from summitek [http://www.summitek.com/][/url]
     
  15. Donald Miller

    Donald Miller Member

    Messages:
    6,242
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I am happy that you experienced the results that you want with the material. My complaint with this film, which I still maintain, is that it fails to build density range (aka contrast). This is a deficiency in the material when one wants to expand contrast to the levels that one would want for Azo or alternative printing (1.60 in the case of grade two Azo). Additionally this is a bothersome aspect when one wants to expand a low brightness ratio scene into a greater contrast. I found that with development times of 18 minutes with 2-2-100 Pyrocat that I was not able to expand the film past one zone of expansion. I found myself printing these negatives at grade five and they will need further intensification or contrast masking to achieve the results desired. This requires additional time that I would rather spend in exposing film.

    Granted, if one overexposes the film by three stops, it should build density. I have no doubt of that. But building density range is another matter in my experience. Good luck to you in your photography.
     
  16. Annie

    Annie Member

    Messages:
    273
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Paddy mentions in his posting that Classic Pan200 is AKA BPF200 & then later states it is the same film packaged as FortePan 200. Could someone please clarify for me .......Are these 3 films in fact the same film?
     
  17. Francesco

    Francesco Member

    Messages:
    1,020
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Location:
    Düsseldorf,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Nope they are not Annie. Fortepan 200 and Classic 200 are the same. BPF is Bergger.

    I agree with Don about Bergger. Besides if you need a 200 ASA film, why buy Bergger when Classic/Fortepan 200 is available and cheaper (at least where I buy mine) - and so much better!
     
  18. Annie

    Annie Member

    Messages:
    273
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Whew! That's a relief ..... I just made an order to J&C for more of the Classic 200 and thought I might be in for the same problems that Don was having. Ordering from J&C is cheaper for me too and I am in Canada. There is no duty on photographic film entering Canada and Customs charges a flat $5 'handling fee' per package regardless of contents. The taxes that we pay on film imports in British Columbia are the same as those when purchasing domestically so for me J&C is cheaper than 8 Elm as the shipping & taxes are about the same.