Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 72,438   Posts: 1,596,945   Online: 1188
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Århus, Denmark
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,102
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by djklmnop
    I shoot Pan F religiously for portraits.

    Here are my findings:

    ISO 20

    Ilford Perceptol 1:3 @ 75F for 12.5 minutes (Jobo CPE2+)

    Of course you will have to do your own density testing to account for the inconsistency between camera shutter, water quality, agitation method, etc.

    I would not recommend using Pan F with any developer that has Hydroquinone incorporated. Those developers contain a lot of restrainer to make up for the miniscule fogging caused by Hydroquinone, leaving you with very muddled results.

    Microdol-X, Perceptol, Rodinal, etc are excellent.

    I've attached a sample from my recent shoot using the tested recipe noted above.

    Andy
    The picture is VERY nice. The skin tones and the hair are perfectly sparkling.

  2. #12
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    I shot a roll of PAN F 50 yesterday around Battlesbridge. As it was a very grey sky, to avoid it 'whiting out' I used a yellow filter. Most of the exposures were between 1/8 sec and 1/4 sec at f16 and f22. I developed in Rodinal at 1+50, 20c for 11 minutes. The negs seem very dark and even a bit 'muddy'.
    I have only been developing my own negs for a few weeks and have not yet reached anywhere near full 'alchemist' status! Did I go wrong with the developing, or should I perhaps have not bothered with the lens filter?

    See the attached files:


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Les McLean
    .... The subject range that you described was comprehensive and clearly chosen to assess the film/developer combination. However, I would strongly suggest that you stop metering from a grey card and read the light value in the darkest shadows and the brightest highlight to determine the contrast range that you are photographing. Having done that, base your exposure on the shadow reading by closing down the camera lens by one, two or three stops depending on how dark you want the shadow. My suggestion would be to close down 2 stops. If the contrast range is greater than 5 stops reduce development to reduce contrast, if it is 2 to 5 stops develop normally and if less than 3 stops increase development to increase contrast. This is the basis of the old addage, "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights". Clearly, what I have suggested is simply a starting point and from there you can fine tune exposure and development to suit your tastes but the above should give you decent negatives....
    Les that is the easiest to understand explanation I've ever read on this subject, my warmest thanks

    Andy if that combo produces beautiful images like that I'm going to have to try it on my wife .... I'll deny I every typed this reply even under torture

  4. #14
    djklmnop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    230
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by TPPhotog
    Andy if that combo produces beautiful images like that I'm going to have to try it on my wife .... I'll deny I every typed this reply even under torture
    I'll pretend you never said that. Give it a try though!

  5. #15
    djklmnop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    230
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K
    I shot a roll of PAN F 50 yesterday around Battlesbridge. As it was a very grey sky, to avoid it 'whiting out' I used a yellow filter. Most of the exposures were between 1/8 sec and 1/4 sec at f16 and f22. I developed in Rodinal at 1+50, 20c for 11 minutes. The negs seem very dark and even a bit 'muddy'.
    I have only been developing my own negs for a few weeks and have not yet reached anywhere near full 'alchemist' status! Did I go wrong with the developing, or should I perhaps have not bothered with the lens filter?
    Try to increase developing time a bit more. Your highlights look a bit depressed (but no way to tell without seeing the negative). Forget about the yellow filter for now. It's good for modifying specific values, but you'll have to know how color filters interact and what value you want to change before you slap one on. Get a successful exposure without any filters first before attempting to add more crazy variables. Try rating the film at ISO 25 and developing it for about 12.5 minutes.

    If you do your own printing, do a straight print, expose for film base's maximum density and that'll give you a direct negative of your exposure.

  6. #16
    BruceN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wyoming
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    585

    Pan F+ reciprocity

    I shoot quite a bit of Pan F+ in 35mm, and frequently measure my exposures in minutes. I had a lot of problems until I started paying attention to Ilford's reciprocity charts.

    You can get the tech data for Pan F+ here: http://www.ilford.com/html/us_englis...Pan_F_Plus.pdf

    The reciprocity chart is on page 2. I compared the charts for Pan F+, FP4+ and HP5+ and found it interesting that they use the exact same chart for all three films. I laminated a copy and now keep it in my gear bag with my spot meter and stop watch.

    Bruce

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,564
    Images
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K
    I shot a roll of PAN F 50 yesterday around Battlesbridge. As it was a very grey sky, to avoid it 'whiting out' I used a yellow filter. Most of the exposures were between 1/8 sec and 1/4 sec at f16 and f22. I developed in Rodinal at 1+50, 20c for 11 minutes. The negs seem very dark and even a bit 'muddy'.
    I have only been developing my own negs for a few weeks and have not yet reached anywhere near full 'alchemist' status! Did I go wrong with the developing, or should I perhaps have not bothered with the lens filter?

    See the attached files:
    Leetle known fact but yeller filters, nor red for that matter, do nothing with a gray sky. Those filters take the blue out of photographs, not gray. The only way to pick up the variation in a gray sky is to keep your development from blowing through the subtleties of the cloud formation, not easy when you are sitting on the top shoulder of the film plane. Your boat picture shows the difficulty in pulling this off. You have gray skys with no texture, yet your highlights in the other parts of the photo are still a dull gray.

    So, blow out the skys and get the rest of the photo correct. Then add Marshalls Color to get yer blue. *L*

    tim in san jose
    Where ever you are, there you be.

  8. #18
    arigram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Crete, Greece
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,474
    Images
    69
    Thank you Les, that was indeed a very well written and helpfull advice.
    I thought I had a good metering technique but now I am rereading all the books I have including A.A.'s Negative.
    God knows when I will be able to shoot with PanF+ again as I used my last roll and my local distributor is having problems with that film - no suprise. It's been three weeks since I told him to get me some and he has not even heard from the Greek representative yet. He tells me that PanF+ is not a film that sells in Greece. No suprise there either.
    I shot some simular stuff with Ilford's FP4+ at 64 iso yesterday and I am going to give it a try with Rodinal at 1-100 dillution (Unfortunately that is the only dillution that the Massive Dev Chart lists at 64 iso).
    I thought of going all the way and ordering some efke 25 film but I read around the net that although the image quality is good, it is a pain in the ass to use: fogs easily, curls, doesn't have good spools, is not very dependable, etc
    Any one want to comment on efke 25?
    What about Maco UP 25 ? Has anyone ever used it?
    aristotelis grammatikakis
    www.arigram.gr
    Real photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
    no digital additives and shit




  9. #19
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    [QUOTE=k_jupiter] You have gray skys with no texture, yet your highlights in the other parts of the photo are still a dull gray.[/QUOTE]

    Thanks Tim.

    The problem is English grey skys have no texture, they are like a grey card from horizon to horizon. I was trying to avoid a plain white sky in the finished shots. Because it was so overcast I figured a blue or red filter would have darkened the rest of the picture too much, so I went with a less dense yellow purely to get the sky a slightly darker in the negatives. But as you say, unfortunately this has affected the darker areas of the shots.

    I plan to do some more today, (although with FP4 instead of PAN F) and again we have a 'grey card' sky. So I'll use no filtering and see what happens.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    921

    Pan F and Rodinal

    Quote Originally Posted by modafoto
    I did 1+100 for 14 minutes and got VERY DULL negs...
    This gives me just the right contrast for bright sunlight. Would 1:50 with a shorter time give more "sparkle". Perhaps-I'm not sure
    Mark Layne
    Nova Scotia
    and Barbados

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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