You will notice the big problem with the pictures is their extreme contrast. That was due to using HC-110 as a developer. Technical Pan was inherently a high contrast film, almost lithographic. It was designed for high contrast technical applications such as astronomy, metallography, certain medical subjects, microscopy, holography, and explosions, replacing several other technical films of the time while giving much higher image quality. When normally developed, it gave fairly high speed (80, more or less, depending on use) and contrast similar to microfilm. For pictorial use, you need to use a special developer that tames the contrast. Kodak Technidol developer was designed for this purpose, but POTA and its derivatives and several other very low contrast developers ("document film developers", in the Anchell and Troop terminology) also work.
Who says it's a problem? It's pretty extreme, but it sounds like Contrastique likes the effect (as the name might suggest).
Originally Posted by nworth
You wouldn't want it for every picture in the world, or anything, but I think it works quite well in those two portraits.
Nice images! I used to use Tech Pan at EI 12 in either C41 developer or the Photographer's Formulary's TD-3. A well respected photographer swore by using TEC developer with an EI of 50.
I thought I read they got 14 stops or more out of this film using POTA. I used it quite a bit at one time - Still have a few boxes of it in the freezer. There is a formula for a TD-3 like developer that uses Catechol. I tried it and got full midtones. My issue with the film is that it is too high in resolution which cost too much in accutance. I had hoped that I could use it with 35mm and get 6x7cm performance. I found that it was possible but did not get the "look" I was after. I found traditional films to be more pleasing. If you are after a lith effect, no need to burn up the worlds remaining sheets of this super hi rez film. Just under expose and over develop some PanF or plus-x and you will get a similar result. Tech pan is capable of getting greater resolution that most lenses can keep up with when exposed and developed properly. Techpan also has an elevated red response and works well with red filters for an almost IR effect. I did not like Technidol, the developer Kodak sold for pictorial use of Techpan I think I still have an old box of it - I doubt the chemistry is still good.
My photos are always without all that distracting color ...
Originally Posted by ntenny
Thanx for all your comments. Would be nice experimenting with this film with a redfilter indeed.
The resolution of this film is incredibly high, I could count the hairs on my face which I only have been able to do with midformat. Quite impressive.
I'll keep this thread updated with my results as long as I haven't ran out of my stock. I'll hate the day when I have.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I did a test years ago for a client comparing Tech Pan processed in Technidol, the discontinued Kodak developer, which gave normal negatives, and very dilute Rodinal. I think 1+125 or 1+200. The Rodinal was very close as I remember. Will try and dig them out and post later the dev/dilution times.
PS. Really like the contrast of the initial shots.
Years ago, I did some portraits for people I knew in college with Tech Pan in 35 mm and processed them in Technidol. I fell in love with it. Time marched on and I did other things. Now it's hard to get Tech Pan but I've been able to get some in 70mm. I have a 70mm back for my Mamiya AND a loader. The film I have is in bulk rolls. So, I plan to get back into the swing of Tech Pan and I'm really looking forward to it. Just need the time to load the cassettes.
While in college, I had my darkroom set up in the chemistry building and was able to really enlarge some of the portraits. My friends were amazed at how big I could get them without it looking grainy.
I didn't like the constrastiness (is that a word?), so I stay with the Technidol. Absolutely beautiful portraits.
It's such a versatile film in that sense. It's just unfortunate that all the good stuff is disappearing. Digital "people" will just NEVER know the beauty and "romance" of film like I experience it. Yes, I do have a digital camera, but it film comes first with me.
Thanx, that would be great! I might be able to get some Technidol from someone but he always forgets bringing it along.
Originally Posted by Mike Crawford
After thinking and thinking about the results I have the feeling I'll continue with the HC110 and see if I can finetune it a little more. I'll try and print some negs (the forest ones I think) coming friday to see if I can get a satisfactoring result.
Technical Pan / Rodinal Dev Times
Have found the tests done on 120 Technical Pan processed in Rodinal. Having done a few clips, the following times gave good results in Rodinal at 1+120. I also processed some film in Technidol as a comparison.
25 ISO - 7 minutes at 20 degrees C
50 ISO - 9 minutes at 20 degrees C
100 ISO - 11 minutes at 20 degrees C
I shot a load of portraits in the studio against a plain gray background. The film rated 25 ISO had the smoothest tonality and was closest to the Technidol and had the best shadow detail. This is not surprising as it is closer to the normal speed of the film I think. The grain, (under very close examination) was slightly more noticeable in Rodinal but only if you are using a loupe. The negs were still a bit contrasty, especially the 100, but no more so than the film in Technidol and printed very well split between grades 0 and 2. Certainly worth trying and at a rough estimation, a roll of 35mm will cost about 5p or 7 cents (Euro not Dollar) in developer!
All the best
Thanx for taking the time looking that up! I'll keep it in mind. Price is certainly no biggie ;-)
Would it be possible to post some examples of your prints up here, like snapshots with a p&s or something, that gives me a rough idea of how it looks?
If not, no probs and thanx for sharing your insights!