Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,837   Posts: 1,582,441   Online: 727
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Photo-gear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Montréal (Québec)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    306
    Images
    9

    Time development with Agfapan APX 100

    On the Massive Chart, there are two sets of time for Agfapan APX 100 (and for 400 too I assume), one for the old version and the other one for the "new" version.

    I have one 100ft roll of Agfanpan APX 100 in the fridge (expiration time: 2010) and before using it, I was wondering how I could differentiate this roll from the "new" and the old version.

    Massive Chart:
    http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart...er=&mdc=Search

  2. #2
    Jim Noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,904
    Blog Entries
    1
    You have a "New" roll.
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Films NOT Dead - Just getting fixed![/FONT]

  3. #3
    piu58's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Leipzig, Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    605
    Agfa never made different versions of APX. The last huge batch was coated in 2005, when Agfa Photo bankrupted. Agfa used the old recipes.
    ---
    Uwe Pilz

  4. #4
    Rhodes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Figueira da Foz, Portugal
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    425
    Rodinal 1:50 12m, the best!

  5. #5
    skahde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    425
    Images
    4
    I second Uwe: Agfa never changed APX100. So wherever different times are reported, take it with a grain of salt.

  6. #6
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,344
    Maybe some will disagree but I have always found APX 100 to be an honest stop slower than 'standard' (ie, PX or TMAX 100 or FP4 +) ISO 100 films, with a commensurate increase in 'lack of grain' and acutance. More similar to Pan F, it needs less development than the 'standard' 100 ISO by about, say, 10% to 15%. I have determined this by closely monitoring shadow detail. - David Lyga

  7. #7
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area (Albany, California)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,250
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    Rodinal 1:50 12m, the best!
    I've found this to be very close too:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/38698047@N00/1366426720
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    818
    David, if it's a stop slower, wouldn't it need extra development time?

  9. #9
    Photo-gear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Montréal (Québec)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    306
    Images
    9
    Even though the distinction is made by the Massive Chart?

  10. #10
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,344
    NB23: No, it's a bit slower and gains contrast rapidly, thus needs a little less development time, just like Pan F needs less development time than does Plus X. - David Lyga
    Last edited by David Lyga; 01-03-2012 at 04:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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