Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,283   Posts: 1,535,045   Online: 1052
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1
    Contrastique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    176
    Images
    68

    Kodak Technical Pan

    As you may have read in another thread (about ATP-V1) I was able to lay my hands on some Technical Pan film. Most of them expired in 1993 but 2 of them in 1986. I would like to share some impressions as I have come to absolutely love this film.

    The first 2 films have been treated as a 100 iso and developed for 6 minutes in the HC-110. I made that choice because at that time I didn't know anything about that film and I wanted to try them out.
    Result: Very tin negs but the extreme contrast just blew me away, in other words, I loved it immediately.
    Examples:


    By contrastique at 2008-01-24


    By contrastique at 2008-01-24


    By contrastique at 2008-01-24

    I decided to try 2 more films, treated as 25 iso now, developed in the HC-110, again for 6 minutes to see the difference.
    Result: Negs are a whole lot better this time. More detail in highs and lows. Contrast is huge, like graphical and I love it even more. Suits my name well, I guess haha..
    Only the highs are like so heavy I think I developed too long. So third batch will be developed (again HC-110) for about 5 or 5 1/2 minutes. Still debating what I should pick. Maybe 5 1/2 minutes will make too little of a difference or 5 minutes will be too much of a difference. Anybody an opinion?

    Also I intent to buy the Rollei RLC developer since I want to experiment with the ATP-V1 in the near future and that developer can also be used with the TechPan. Would I loose a lot of contrast when using that developer? The examples I saw with the LC developer didn't really blow my mind.
    I really like the results so far although it still needs some finetuning so I'm wondering which way to go with this film. I guess I just try the developer and if not liked I'll go back to my HC-110...

    Some examples of the second batch:


    By contrastique at 2008-02-20


    By contrastique at 2008-02-20


    By contrastique at 2008-02-20

  2. #2
    Iwagoshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    NorCal
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    455
    Images
    17
    "Contrastique" indeed!

    The first set I did not think was a good representative of the film's capabilties, but with the second set I'm beginning to see what the hoopla is all about. Very graphic...Frank Miller Graphic.

    Terry

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    136
    Sorry, but these picture are not good. I used Tech. Pan too, and the contrast was normal with 1.25 density at "zone" 8. Might be it turned something wrong with your scanning.
    By the way when you got the films. As I know they gone. Hm never know.

  4. #4
    Contrastique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    176
    Images
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielOB View Post
    Sorry, but these picture are not good. I used Tech. Pan too, and the contrast was normal with 1.25 density at "zone" 8. Might be it turned something wrong with your scanning.
    By the way when you got the films. As I know they gone. Hm never know.
    The scans are not the best indeed as I lost some detail in the highs and lows. But the negs do contain this amount of contrast for real. I think that's due to the developer I used. You probably used a low-contrast developer. I'm gonna try that soon but I think I'll stick with the HC-110 to see if I can improve development since I do like this contrast a whole lot. It's all in the eyes of the beholder
    I got the films from where I work. We got a batch of this films from the hospital who used to work with these films. Nobody had interest in them so I took them all
    Mind you, they are quite old.

  5. #5
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    I used Tech Pan at an EI of 200 to develop it in Dektol stock, 3 mins. According to Kodak, this gives you a contrast index around 2.5, which is pretty extreme. I copied some engravings with it, and it was perfect, but I got some halfway interesting results with continuous tone subjects, like you did. I like your pictures better than mine, though I think I should try again, with a slightly lower CI.
    Using film since before it was hip.


    "One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11

    My APUG Portfolio

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    17

    Dektol, etc.

    I've used it with Dektol straight-up, 2 minutes. nice and contrasty, not too much midtones but some.

    The best is using it with Technidol, really. Superbly continuous results, and contrast that can be controlled nicely by printing on grade 1 paper (sometimes grade 2).

    I still have 5+ bulk rolls of this to shoot sometime in the future.

    FWIW
    -Ed

  7. #7
    Contrastique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    176
    Images
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by mhv View Post
    I used Tech Pan at an EI of 200 to develop it in Dektol stock, 3 mins. According to Kodak, this gives you a contrast index around 2.5, which is pretty extreme. I copied some engravings with it, and it was perfect, but I got some halfway interesting results with continuous tone subjects, like you did. I like your pictures better than mine, though I think I should try again, with a slightly lower CI.
    Thanx
    I believe I have some Dektol lying around somewhere. Have already ordered the RLC developer and the ATP-V1 so I'll see where that'll get me.

  8. #8
    Contrastique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    176
    Images
    68
    For those interested I experimented some more. I used one film in studio to see how it would react with faces. The results are again extremely contrastful. I wish I could post the negs here as they contain more detail than the scans do.
    I developed again in HC-110 as I haven't received the RLC-developer yet. I developed for 5 1/2 minutes now compared to the 6 before. They no longer look overdeveloped but the contrast as said before is HUGE!! So here we go (again):





    The second one is with my face wrapped in plastic because I liked the idea and wanted to see how it would work out.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    105
    Images
    14
    I like the portraits, they are a great example of how Technical Pan can be used to give a unique look. If you want less contrast and want to stay with HC110, try exposing at ei of 12 and reducing the development time a little, you will probably have to increase the dilution so that you will have a long enough development time to get even development, or you could try just taking off a half minute time down to 5 and see how that looks. Dektol will probably give you more contrast, if that is what you are looking for. Lots of contrast like you got in the top portrait above is exactly what some people are looking for and if you like that degree of contrast don't change a thing. You might be able to get less contrast with the portraits by just reducing the contrast in the lighting and leaving everything else the same, i.e. exposure and development. It also looks like the lighting was very high contrast in the landscape photos, not the best match for Technical Pan unless you really want high contrast in the final image.
    Keep up the good work,
    Doug Webb

  10. #10
    Contrastique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    176
    Images
    68
    Thanx for you comment. I ordered the RLC but I'm not sure if I'll like that. I actually like the contrast the HC110 provides me with and if the Dektol gives me even more, I'll pass.
    Next film will be developed at 5 to see how the highs end up.
    The lighting is the thing I'll likely change the next time. I used one flashlight with softbox very close to my head and no reflection board on the other side. I'll add that the next time to try and get more gray tones in it. I'm very pleased though. This film is just crazy!
    The contrast was meant to be there in the landscapes. Again in those negs is far more detail than in the scans. Still have to print them to see how it works out in the darkroom.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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