Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,986   Posts: 1,524,000   Online: 830
      
Page 4 of 32 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 312
  1. #31
    viridari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina [USA]
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    330
    Images
    22
    Pan F+ in 4x5 ... I'm wondering why it's not already there? I've had some fun with Pan F+ in 135 and, to a lesser extent, in 120. I noticed its absence from the 4x5 lineup at Freestyle when I bought my first box of film last summer for my Crown Graphic (first LF camera).

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    I thought there were technical reasons why they can't coat pan F on sheet film?

    Maybe Delta 100 in sheet is the best compromise? It can be downrated in something like perceptol to give a similar effect to a true low speed film at maybe an EI of 50. Maybe some of the gurus on here can get it to behave even more like an old slow emulsion with a pyro developer...
    Steve

  3. #33
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,220
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    I thought there were technical reasons why they can't coat pan F on sheet film?

    Maybe Delta 100 in sheet is the best compromise? It can be downrated in something like perceptol to give a similar effect to a true low speed film at maybe an EI of 50. Maybe some of the gurus on here can get it to behave even more like an old slow emulsion with a pyro developer...
    There are technical issues but then . . . . . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by viridari View Post
    Pan F+ in 4x5 ... I'm wondering why it's not already there? I've had some fun with Pan F+ in 135 and, to a lesser extent, in 120. I noticed its absence from the 4x5 lineup at Freestyle when I bought my first box of film last summer for my Crown Graphic (first LF camera).
    Do we really need Pan F in LF sizes ?

    I've used EFKE (Adox) Pl25 and Kb25 since the 1970's and it's similar in speed to Tmax100 - 50EI in Daylight, if I used FP4 it was at 64 EI - so close.

    Last few years I've been shooting HP5 for 5x4 hand held work with my Crown and more recently Super Graphics and the quality in terms of grain, sharpness and tonality is outstanding, Delta 100 is now my main film. The quality of all the Ilford LF films is so high I couldn't think why I'd need PanF in LF sizes, however if my main work was on 120 or 35mm with a tripod I would use Pan F exclusively.

    Ian

  4. #34
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    2013 ULF Manufacture From ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    There are technical issues but then . . . . . . .



    Do we really need Pan F in LF sizes ?

    I've used EFKE (Adox) Pl25 and Kb25 since the 1970's and it's similar in speed to Tmax100 - 50EI in Daylight, if I used FP4 it was at 64 EI - so close.

    Last few years I've been shooting HP5 for 5x4 hand held work with my Crown and more recently Super Graphics and the quality in terms of grain, sharpness and tonality is outstanding, Delta 100 is now my main film. The quality of all the Ilford LF films is so high I couldn't think why I'd need PanF in LF sizes, however if my main work was on 120 or 35mm with a tripod I would use Pan F exclusively.

    Ian
    PanF+ is WAY different than D100, it reacts to pushing very different, the tones an style of the effect on skin tones for me is very different and it's a traditional grain, it shouldn't be the same as a T grain, it more than just about the fine grain nature, it's a whole different animal.

    If they had PanF+ in 4x5 I doubt I would even buy another film for daylight work.

    If they could make a film with the characteristics of PanF+ and the reciprocity failure rates of Acros 100 I would never buy any other B&W film but Ilford.

    But I digress. Point is I'm not the only one, and I doubt that delta rated at EI 50 dev in Rodinal pushed 2 stops would give anything like PanF+ because its only a 1 stop push in reality, which doesn't push the highlights enough, and I think the ability to not burn out the highlights in a push is another PanF+ behavior I like, at least on my system.


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  5. #35
    LJH
    LJH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Do we really need Pan F in LF sizes ?
    I think that outdoor portrait shooters using wide open barrel lenses would argue "yes".

    As, too, would those who have been put out by the demise of the slow Efke films (25 & 50).

    Now, if there was an Acros 50...

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    PanF+ is WAY different than D100, it reacts to pushing very different, the tones an style of the effect on skin tones for me is very different and it's a traditional grain, it shouldn't be the same as a T grain, it more than just about the fine grain nature, it's a whole different animal.

    If they had PanF+ in 4x5 I doubt I would even buy another film for daylight work.

    If they could make a film with the characteristics of PanF+ and the reciprocity failure rates of Acros 100 I would never buy any other B&W film but Ilford.

    But I digress. Point is I'm not the only one, and I doubt that delta rated at EI 50 dev in Rodinal pushed 2 stops would give anything like PanF+ because its only a 1 stop push in reality, which doesn't push the highlights enough, and I think the ability to not burn out the highlights in a push is another PanF+ behavior I like, at least on my system.



    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    Of course, Delta 100 is a completely different film to Pan F+ and will behave quite differently. But maybe the relevent question should be: if you have a particular 'look' or characteristic that you are after, is there a way, with the right techniques, that you couldn get it with Delta?

    I mean, if you like the ultra grain free, razor sharp images in your Hasselblad then maybe only T max 100 or Across ot Delta 100 will do. But if you like the grainy, contasty, 1950s style of emulsion but all you have is T Max, surely you have a chance of getting a similar effect, because you can control contrast, colour sensitivity (with filters), the curve shape ( to some degree at least) and the grain. Boil T-max up in concentrated print developer and it looks very different! With sufficient experimentation I bet you could emulate something from years ago or something of lesser technological development.

    In the case of 'pushed' pan F+ effect you were describing (something I've not done very much as I have always found it very contrasty and easy to make unprintable) - could Delta 100 with an ND filter over the lens and pushed in a compensating developer give a similar effect? I don't know, I've never tried it, but since sheet Delta 100 is available and sheet pan F+ isn't, I would humbly suggest it is worth trying.
    Steve

  7. #37
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,780
    The easiest solution would simply be to get a 6x7 or 6x9 rollfilm back for your view camera. Of course you still get a MF sized negative (my 6x6 ones from Pan F+ print beautifully at 15x15, with invisible grain, so I'm sure a 6x7 would go to 16x20 without issue) and you may run into short lens issues when you need wide angle, but for many shots it will give you the movements and workflow of the viewcamera with Pan F+. I use a 6x7 back for color myself. LF color is simply too expensive and too hard, and expensive, to get processed, and I don't do enough color of any kind to bother with it myself again yet.

  8. #38
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    2013 ULF Manufacture From ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    Of course, Delta 100 is a completely different film to Pan F+ and will behave quite differently. But maybe the relevent question should be: if you have a particular 'look' or characteristic that you are after, is there a way, with the right techniques, that you couldn get it with Delta?

    I mean, if you like the ultra grain free, razor sharp images in your Hasselblad then maybe only T max 100 or Across ot Delta 100 will do. But if you like the grainy, contasty, 1950s style of emulsion but all you have is T Max, surely you have a chance of getting a similar effect, because you can control contrast, colour sensitivity (with filters), the curve shape ( to some degree at least) and the grain. Boil T-max up in concentrated print developer and it looks very different! With sufficient experimentation I bet you could emulate something from years ago or something of lesser technological development.

    In the case of 'pushed' pan F+ effect you were describing (something I've not done very much as I have always found it very contrasty and easy to make unprintable) - could Delta 100 with an ND filter over the lens and pushed in a compensating developer give a similar effect? I don't know, I've never tried it, but since sheet Delta 100 is available and sheet pan F+ isn't, I would humbly suggest it is worth trying.
    Look at my gallery's or examples, at least within the first page a woman's chest is a good example. Also a girl with a guitar I think as well.

    I don't want to learn a new system, and I want to support Ilford. I dislike Tmax, I have 3 rolls left and if I can get one image I'm happy with I'll be surprised. I'll try rating the 400 at 320, maybe that will help, but I might need to go as low as 200, and then what's the point lol.

    Thanks, this is a request forum, please respect that this is about us asking Ilford to make this for those that want it, stop trying to put the idea down, it's not polite, some of us want it, let us ask and stop trying to tell me how to do something different when I already know what I want.

    EDIT: sorry the examples are on page 2 of my gallery...

    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by StoneNYC; 03-04-2013 at 07:59 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Page 2
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,432
    Wouldn't FP4+ be a better candidate than Delta 100?

    I believe FP4+ is readily available in 4x5 and other sheets.
    - Bill Lynch

  10. #40
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    Wouldn't FP4+ be a better candidate than Delta 100?

    I believe FP4+ is readily available in 4x5 and other sheets.
    Yes, however I would still prefer PanF+ to FP4+

Page 4 of 32 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin