Royal Pan, Ektapan, Super XX, etc.....tell me about.
Kodak has discontinued a lot of b/w films over the years.
I have questions, hopefully someone out there has answers.
First..Kodak Royal Pan...ISO 400. What was its intended purpose, since Tri-x is virtually the same ISO?
Ektapan..I have used it, but why was ther Ektapan and Plus-X, almost the same ISO?
Super XX, ISO 200..Why is it legendary? Is it better than Tri-X? (was)
Curious minds want to know.
IIRC, Royal Pan was made in sheet film only. When I started in the 60's, it was a favorite of pros. Back then, I shot most of my commercial B&W stuff on Royal Pan.
"I always take a camera, That way I never have to say 'Gee, look at that - I wish I had a camera'" -Joe Clark, H.B.S.S.
Originally Posted by PHOTOTONE
Royal Pan was also made in ISO 800, or maybe it was Royal Pan Plus
Ektapan and Plux-X have different curves. Many people used Ektanpan primarily in the studio, Plus X outside.
Super XX is legendary because of its long straight line curve, similar in all colors, and for its great potential for expansion and contraction development.
In regards to Super XX, in addition to being a silver based film, it had a gold component in the emulsion (if I'm not mistaken). It is claimed to hold a longer tonal scale than any other negative film manufactured.
Go to www.michaelandpaula.com - you can find information on Kodak Super XX on those pages somewhere. I have seen a large collection of Michael Smith's prints at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, and they are phenomenal Azo prints.
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
The high speed film was Royal X Pan. It was awful IMHO.
All films currently in production have a gold component.
Super XX was a fine film for its day, but used environmentally hazardous materials including mercury IIRC. It was discontinued.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I have a full box of 4X5 Royal Pan in the freezer. Hopefully, it will be used up by the end of the summer. I'm anxious to see what it does.
Ektapan was great in the studio with strobes. It was very useful when you had to shoot the same image (often a product shot) in color and B&W. It gave you a similar tonal "look" to color films of the day. It was terrible out doors, looked flat.
DIGITAL IS FOR THOSE AFRAID OF THE DARK.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
Yes, Royal-X Pan was pretty bad -- but it was also ASA 1250, which no-one has mentioned yet. What killed it, I believe, is the decline of 4x5 inch/9x12cm for reportage. With the much faster lenses of 35mm and even roll-film cameras, the market for an unbelievably grainy, low-contrast, expensive, super-fast film diminished abruptly. Though Ilford's HPS (ASA 800) vanished around the same time, and that was available even in 35mm, I think.
Carl Kohrt told me that Super-XX was the last Kodak film containing cadmium and was knocked on the head for that reason alone. People were still buying it, and Kodak will make anything as long as people buy it. The last time I checked, Ektachrome 64 was still in production, despite the fact that almost any Kodak slide film of the last 20 years was better by any objective criterion.
Do I recall correctly that gold sensitization was an Agfa discovery?
Royal X Pan also came in 120 rollfilm back in the 70s
I had some 120 Royal X Pan. I shot the last of it 3 years ago.
Gold sensitization was an Agfa discovery, sulfur sensitization was a Kodak discovery.