Agfa APX 400...advice?

[Dave Wilkinson]

Recently a good friend on the forum - Brian ( Scotforthlad ), very generously passed on to me a 48 metre roll of Agfa APX 400, a little out of date, but refrigerated. Naturally, I was very pleased, thinking it would satisfy my mono requirements for quite a while, but having shot a couple of rolls, the results are dissapointing compared to my usual diet of HP5 and TRI X.
The only developer I can buy locally now, is ID11, but I have been happy with this stuff for many years, - yet the APX 400 at 15mins. - 1+1 just does'nt seem to do the business. Before I experiment further, I wonder if this fim is particularly sensitive to developer choice? - should I push a little?, maybe pull? and use a totally different soup?. experiences and thoughts appreciated, please.
Cheers, Dave.
PS This stuff seems to have quite a pronounced blue colour, to the backing!...normal?

 

[fidget]

I had this experience too! The film backing has a normal "fog". It's a bit alarming at first, but appears to be normal.
I found that I couldn't get a good image when run at 400 in ID11 at 1:1. Now I meter it at 200 and dev in ID11 at 1:1, or will try ID11 at stock next time.
If you like grain and an old look, it is great. In good conditions it has given me really nice images. I've tried it in Rodinal 1:50 and can say that you must really like grain in this.
The fact that I can't run it at 400 has put me off using it, although many do rate it at 400, I guess that they run in a different dev.

Dave..

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

You didn't say what you don't like about it.

Pretty much what Fidget says above........grainy, 'flat' and low contrast, and that misty blue backing.

 

[fidget]

I just tried to find a scan of the sort of results which I mean. I didn't find the one I had in mind, but went through a selection of pics taken on various old cams. I must say that quite often, the image quality (contrast, grain etc) has been fine. Perhaps much of my failure with this film is down to my process not being nailed properly (Although you do have to be a grain fan).
I guess that I am used to most film giving acceptable results on my first or first few rolls through my process. Maybe this one needs a little more effort on my part.
The pale blue fog is not an issue, once you've got over the shock.
Dave....

 

[waileong]

APX 400 works fine in ID11, as with most negs you can expose +1 stop for better shadow detail. If your negs are too thin, develop longer. If too thick, reduce develop shorter.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I used to develop it in Rodinal with good results.

120 size APX 400

35mm size

I don't think it is flat and low contrast if developed right

 

[dcsang]

Shoot it at 200 ISO and dev it as 400 in Rodinal and you're set.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Tom A]

It could be APX 400S - a traffic camera film on a thin estar base. I was given a couple of cans of it some years ago (150ft/can rather than the usual 100ft cans). It does have a pronounced "blue" tinged backing on it. I tried it in a variety of developers. including Rodinal, FX 37 etc. It works, but it is a bit less "full" tonality than stock APX 400. The police was mainly interested in getting the license plate sharp anyway - not in the Zone system!

 

[Tom A]

Dave, if you go to our Flickr site and tag it "APX 400S" - there are 69 shots uploaded, done with the APX 400S and mainly with the FX 37 developer (G. Crawley's formulation - works very well with both APX 400 and the 400S designation) and some with Tmax developer. So, it might not have the tonal range of Pan F - but it was free - so keep shooting it.

 

[morback]

Never had that problem when I was still processing film in college. Actually the negatives came out super clear compared to ilford and kodak. They had a certain brilliance to them and they printed so easely and beautifully. Amazing tonality and sharpness with just enough grain for me...

The blue color tells me you're not fixing properly...If you work on that maybe the rest will align as well...You should not have a hint of blue.

 

[Tom A]

The fact the can Dave got was 48 meters ( about 160 ft) makes me suspect that it is 400S (I think S stood for Surveillance or Special).
Dave, check the edge marking and see if it says 400S on it. Very thin base, almost impossible to tear off from the spool. I suspect that the blue color backing and base was used to enhance contrast for reading the license number on the car. I think "Silver Image" in UK bought up a lot of it and resold it for a nice price (about two years ago?). I tried to buy some from them, but they had already sold out by the time I got in touch with them. A good friend in the UK had laid his hand on several cans though and shipped 3-4 cans to me.
Try Rodinal too, 1:25/6-7 min or 1:50 for 11 min. Didn't work with Rod 1:100 for 20 min according to my notes. Too flat. Speed was close to 400 with FX 37 - around 250/320 with Rodinal 1:50/12 min.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

Dave, if you go to our Flickr site and tag it "APX 400S" - there are 69 shots uploaded, done with the APX 400S and mainly with the FX 37 developer (G. Crawley's formulation - works very well with both APX 400 and the 400S designation) and some with Tmax developer. So, it might not have the tonal range of Pan F - but it was free - so keep shooting it.

Thanks Tom and others, - just peeped in the 'fridge, and it is indeed APX400 S ahh, well! - time for experimenting!
Cheers, Dave.