NO! Not whether you like or dislike it...but after reading several suggestions to down rate several medium/fast speed films (such as FP5 from 400 to 200) and reading the recent thread on Delta 25, would anyone recommend rating PanF+ down to 25?
I've been getting pretty satisfactory results with it rated at 50. I wasn't planning to change that anytime soon, but I just got to wondering......
It all depends on your developer and your preferences. There's no need to change until one of those change!
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Exactly, I am fully agree with your comment Ole.
But indeed PANF is under some light conditions and typical developers a rather "difficult" film.
In the past I prefered the APX25, that's why I am quite happy with the new Rollei PAN25. Not the same as APX25 but more flexible than the PANF.
I'm fairly content to keep using Rodinal 1:50 with PanF. I originally thought that 50 was just about as slow as one would normally go in a film speed. And, I'm not really at a point where I want to play around too much with pushing and pulling...
The thread which talked about some of the 400 speed films not really being 400 speed and should be rated down to get better results, got me to wondering about PanF...
I found that to be true.
Originally Posted by Fotohuis
I also found that under low contrast (like overcast for eg) light, it looks wonderful (in Rodinal, of course! 1:50 is what I use).
One more thing - there is a very commonly held belief that PanF is actually closer to 25 than it is to 50. Many people swear by it, rate the film at 25 because they... well, believe it is. And I cannot argue with their results - some great work I have seen. I know one guy who rates at 25 and soups in Diafine... havent tried, but again, his results are nice. Have not tested it myself - but would not be at all shocked if the 25 speed belief is very true.
Have not tried it - worked well at 50 for me, mind you , I have a tendency to "when in doubt, open up"...
Lovely, albeit temperamental, film.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I, too, like Pan F. Got about 600 feet of 35mm in the freezer and thinking about getting more. I also use Rodinal 1:50 and it is awesome for low contrast situations. For high contrast days try this: Rodinal 1:200 / 90 minute stand development (agitate for first 10 seconds, then 1 inversion at 45 minutes). I suspect you'll be pleased.
I have consistently needed to rate PanF+ at 25-32 to get proper toes and separation in the shadows. I used lots of it some years ago with traditional developers (to me, anyway....D76, FG7) and never got a true speed over that with both good shadows and controlled highlights. I find that I have a great deal of forgotten 120 stock in the freezer and also bought 2 spools of 35mm from the individual who posted some here in APUG. I think I'll get back to wringing some out with Jay's soups, PyroCat, etc and see what sort of behavior that I see. Maybe something will prove compatible with the PanF+ and I'll have a nice combination to rely on. An acquaintance of mine does beautiful portraits on PanF+ in TMax. This wouldn't have been my instinct to try but it works very well for him.
PAN F+ is a great film that can be used in more ways than normally expected. A lot of people have problems with the film because it responds to even slight irregularities in exposure and development. If you rate it @ 25 and develop accordingly you will get an amazing quality. I use it @ 12 and 25 for studio work (still life) from time to time. Great grain and sharpness in Rodinal 1+50 and 1+100.
Originally Posted by joeyk49
I hate scans.. but here goes anyway:
PamF at box speed (or close to it - I always tend to err on the side of caution and open up a bit), in Rodinal 1:50. 35mm, 8x10 print - but this is a vertical crop from a horizontal frame.
Taken on a cloudy day - right before a big storm, actually.
I may just try this...
Originally Posted by BruceN
I was shooting some test shots with my newly operational Yash Electro GS. I developed the PanF negs in Rodinal 1:50. My initial looks at the negs were promising. I had a couple of prints made at a local lab (cheaper, with more consistant output) and found the prints to be very contrasty.
I made the exposures on a mostly sunny day after four olclock. I thoough I was safe with the light, but the prints had me scratching my head.
So do you think its the film, or the film/dev combo?