Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,973   Posts: 1,558,699   Online: 838
      
Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 111

Thread: Bad Pan F ??

  1. #61
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,475
    Images
    225

    Bad Pan F ??

    Please send this to ilford I would like to hear their explanation please.


    ~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

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    734
    Bob,
    Very interessant.

    But why, then, does my "expired in 2005 but shot in March and developed in April" Pan-F look like your "Expiration date 2015, exposed & Developed March 2012"?


    If the "poor latent image" theory was true my negs should show no markings at all. But yet they do and they are very contrasty. This clearly contradicts the theory. And yet, I've also had very faint images shot on fresh pan-f.

  3. #63

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    VT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    576
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Bob,
    Very interessant.

    But why, then, does my "expired in 2005 but shot in March and developed in April" Pan-F look like your "Expiration date 2015, exposed & Developed March 2012"? If the "poor latent image" theory was true my negs should show no markings at all. But yet they do and they are very contrasty. This clearly contradicts the theory.
    Well we keep reading this but we do not see this...


    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    And yet, I've also had very faint images shot on fresh pan-f.
    We all make mistakes in exposure and development from time to time. This is really nothing to be embarrassed about.
    Last edited by sepiareverb; 04-11-2013 at 09:54 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #64
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,475
    Images
    225

    Bad Pan F ??

    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Bob,
    Very interessant.

    But why, then, does my "expired in 2005 but shot in March and developed in April" Pan-F look like your "Expiration date 2015, exposed & Developed March 2012"?


    If the "poor latent image" theory was true my negs should show no markings at all. But yet they do and they are very contrasty. This clearly contradicts the theory. And yet, I've also had very faint images shot on fresh pan-f.
    PLEASE send it to ilford.. I'm getting tired of you being so insistent yet failing to to do the easiest thing which is find out from the source, not just for you but for us...

    Not to be rude but... Put up, or shut up...


    ~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. #65

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,474
    From what I see the images are as expected but the concern is about the edge markings?

    Who gives a shoot about the markings? As long as there are pictures...
    - Bill Lynch

  6. #66
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,011
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    From what I see the images are as expected but the concern is about the edge markings?

    Who gives a shoot about the markings? As long as there are pictures...
    I don't think there's any "concern" about the edge markings. They're just a marker for the known poor latent image stability of Pan F+. The film keeps fine in the sense that you can expose it up to (and in practice after) expiration date and still get fine image results, as long as you process promptly. But if you don't process promptly the image begins to fade. The edge mark fading just confirms that, since they are exposed into the film at Ilford. This doesn't hurt anything, unless you really need those edge marks for some reason.

  7. #67
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,475
    Images
    225

    Bad Pan F ??

    I JUST developed a roll of pan F shot at 100 and developed at 80, I'll post them soon after I scan, the image is SLIGHTLY faded, but I didn't fully push it so I sort of expected that...



    As you can see the PanF words at the bottom are totally gone, and yet the arrows at the top are clear (though light) I under developed this roll on purpose partly because of this conversation, it appears at least on the 120, the pan f wording on the bottom is less-imprinted than the arrows at the top. Wonder if this is the issue for the OP?


    ~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

  8. #68
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,475
    Images
    225

    Bad Pan F ??

    Soo... Even my negs just looked too thin, I was kind of surprised when I saw and then wondered if the OP was right, then I just realized I measured for 35mm instead of 120 so instead of 1:50 in Rodinal I did 1:100 ... But developed for 1:50 times... So this is USER ERROR and my fail... Kind of sad, the images still scan OK but would have a much higher contrast which is what I was looking for, instead they are smooth er... Oh well... That's what you get for rushing....


    ~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

  9. #69
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,475
    Images
    225
    As promised... the image that I posted earlier ... and then some product placement... I'm really pissed about the bad development, that product placement would have been MUCH better :/

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PanFat100-Rodinal1to100-DevAs1to50at80-totallymessedupDev-1.jpg 
Views:	83 
Size:	238.2 KB 
ID:	67116Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PanFat100-Rodinal1to100-DevAs1to50at80-totallymessedupDev-10.jpg 
Views:	76 
Size:	269.6 KB 
ID:	67117

  10. #70

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,869
    Dear Stone,

    I will never look at a roll of PAN F + in the same light again....forgive me if I decide not to use that image in the 2014 calender....

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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