Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,550   Posts: 1,544,870   Online: 976
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Pan F problems?

  1. #11
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,892
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    I wonder what Ilford has to say about this alleged latent image issue with Pan F. I use "alleged" for quasi legal reasons as I don't think there is any incontrovertible proof to date.

    As others have said I seriously doubt that it misbehaves when being processed. I have used it only once when my ignorance of film in general was bliss and didn't see a problem when I processed it.

    Indeed if there was a proven issue on latent image you'd think that Ilford would have mentioned it. I can't be the only photographer not to process for several months so if I were ever to use Pan F again it would be helpful to know what the maximum time it can be left exposed but undeveloped.

    pentaxuser
    No legal issues in saying, "in my experience, latent images on Pan F haven't kept nearly as well when development was not prompt as they do on other films" which is pretty much all anyone has said. And I seem to recall something on the box about developing promptly, maybe more firmly worded than the usual such disclaimer - I'd have to dig a roll out of the film fridge to look and that's downstairs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Worker 11811 View Post
    Develop your own.

    I shoot Pan F+ and even if I could send it some place else, I wouldn't because this is one film that has to be developed "just right."
    Not to say that it's hard to develop but seemingly small changes in agitation, temperature or time can make a visible difference in the result. I just would not trust your average lab to understand that.
    (Unless it is a lab that has experience developing that film... No place around where I live has such experience.)

    Doing it yourself, you have more control over the process. If you want to push, pull or tweak the process.

    If mistakes are made you'll be able to figure out what the problem is. You won't have to worry about what somebody else did to screw up your film.
    (Because you'll be the one who screwed it up! )
    This is true in my experience too, to which I have a one word answer - Diafine. Stone simple and works great with Pan F. Tames the highlight contrast and gives a touch more effective speed too. Box says to shoot it at 80. I use EI 64.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,840
    I would first consider the lab might be the problem. It all depends on who was working that day. I have a favorite restaurant and the food was always excellent until I changed the day of the week I went. Different day, different chef.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  3. #13
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,408

    Pan F problems?

    I've been using and loving pan-f and pan-f+ for 30 years (good god). Obviously I like it. But I never send it off to a lab, and it wouldn't be my first choice if I had to do so.
    The latent image issue is real but not drastic. I can't seem to find it now but I believe Ilford has advised about it, I think Simon has confirmed it as well.

  4. #14
    tony lockerbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bega N.S.W. Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,308
    Images
    373
    Ah-ha, that would explain why most of my Pan-F has very faint numbers. Still a great film and no problems with consistency, which is true of all Ilford films btw.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,301
    Seeing as you are in the UK, try sending to Ilford's processing lab.
    Bob

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    I'd start with the lab. My experiences with Pan F has been nothing short of exceptional quality and I have been dabbling with that film for about...ummm....7 years? If they are thin, sounds like a developer issue. Actually, patchy can be caused too by poor development procedure or spent/incorrectly mixed chemistry.
    +1. PanF Plus (PanF) has been in my arsenal for something in the order of thirty years. No issues at all; an exceptional and absolutely beautiful film (my choice for landscape/architecture/fine art shooting). My guess is that the issue is with your lab; why not process it yourself? Results will likely be more consistent...

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Images
    6
    Helpful comments, thanks all. I think I've had some latency issues so I'll have another go and send them fresh. Doing it myself isn't the easiest option at the moment, though perhaps in the future. Hopefully I can find a way to make it work as I really miss Pan F - nothing quite like it on a good day.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,601
    It could have been improperly spooled onto a reel, if those were involved. It's a tad more sensitive
    in this regard to even film distribution than some other films, though if the film had actually buckled
    and touched it would show as vertical streaks of whatever mush. Sometimes a pinch of EDTA helps.
    But given basic technique, it's relatively cooperative, and nothing particularly weird about the
    processing variables. Obtaining correct contrast is a different subject.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,965
    So have we a consensus that about 3 months is the max time for exposed but undeveloped Pan F before some deterioration in latent image is experienced or have we others here who have left their Pan F for longer without deterioration?

    If Pan F is unique in exhibiting this phenomenon in the Ilford range, I wonder what makes it this way. I have twice been on the Ilford tour and there was nothing I recall being said about its emulsion or production that even hinted at this problem.

    Of course some might say that Ilford wouldn't reveal this any way and that's why nothing was said and indeed according to one poster Ilford has hinted that such a problem exists or has even stated it( Simon Galley being mentioned)

    pentxuser

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,838
    Dear MK II et al,

    Where do we start?

    Latent image stability, a real issue on papers and films, both colour and monochrome some are better than others but by and large they are all amazingly stable especially when you consider the LI performance of 50 years ago. If we talk about PAN F + when the ( all new ) plus emulsions were introduced, one major improvement was latent image stability. I should know, but I don't where PAN F + comes in LI performance compared to our other film emulsions but I will speak to our technical service, they will advise me and I will let you know in the next day or so.

    Dear Pentax user....deeply appreciate the 'allegedly' in the sort of 'Have I got news for you' context, you do not have to worry, ever, I believe in people saying what they think about us and our products, I will always robustly defend, or on occasion agree to differ, but a healthy and positive honest debate is always to be encouraged...

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

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