APX400s development.

[fidget]

Hi, there's an offer on bulk rolls of APX400S in the UK, so I bought a couple of rolls to try. The "S" indicates that the film is the normal APX400 emulsion on a thinner base, so development is as per APX400. I've run a few trials through ID11 at 1:1 and have found that there is a clear "haze" or fog in the film in the margins as well as the exposed frames. When it's wet it looks just great. I've tried putting some into fixer (Agefix 1:5) without any development and found that the haze remains. Is this a feature of this base or a compatibility issue with the fixer? Anyone else run this film?
(I also am now rating it at ISO200 and the last dev was ID11 1:1 20'c for 13m which wasn't enough, still learning!)

Dave

 

[Ash]

i didnt get haze, but i did find underexposure/dev'mt?

 

[markinlondon]

Could the haze be scummy wash water? Try dunking in deionised water for a final rinse or better yet, get some wetting agent such as ilfotol or photoflo and dilute in
deionised water as per instructions.

 

[fidget]

Thanks for the comment. I think that the wash water is good, this has happened quite a few times, used with Jessops wetting agent. The level of "fog" is significant, I would guess that nearly one stop is lost in the range of tones held by the film. I see your point, though, if it looks ok wet.....I'll just dunk a dried strip in water for a while...

ASH didn't get any haze? Got the same film? What fixer do you use?

Dave...
Dave..

 

[Trius]

"Scummy" wash water would possibly be uneven in its effect. Haze remaining on unexposed film that is fixed pretty much eliminates other processing variables; if you fix for 2x clearing time, then fixing is complete.

So, that leaves the film itself unless there is some special chemistry or processing procedure recommended, which I take is not the case. I would be suspicious of storage conditions for the film prior to sale.

 

[Ash]

I'm using Generic fixer. I'll run some more films through in a week or so and let you know if I get some haze after all

 

[phototone]

I have always found that APX-400 has a denser base (looks like very light base fog), regardless of developer. It prints just fine.

 

[rich815]

I would be suspicious of storage conditions for the film prior to sale.

That's my thought too. I hope the fog is something that you can print or scan through without too much issue, or somehow compensate for in development or exposure.

Looking anxiously to see that results from this as I've seen it come available from time to time the US and have hesitated not having heard about nor seen results....

 

[Ash]

I just processed 2 rolls from today (first roll had a few leftover shots on it from last week). I rated it at 400 and developed with just over 2x the concentration I should have. Effectively rating at 400 and developing at 800?

Anyway the negs look nice an dark. They're hanging up to dry. I'll scan them in later tonight.

 

[fidget]

thanks for your comments and help. It seems that a base "fog" may not be uncommon. Perhaps that is what I can see. One thing (in particular) is a puzzle to me is, this is how storage and/or exposure can effect the base of the film, which I imagined would be totally clear after a fix without dev. Unless the "fog that I can see is simply a feature of the base material or a gross incompatibilty with the fixer.
Dave....

 

[Ash]

See here: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=9040683&blogID=183972579

New blog full of shots from Leica with APX400s. Generic (cheap) developer, 1+20ish, 11 minutes (yes, I was lazy with the measurements 😀 ). Straight scans, then levelled in gimpshop to add contrast. Obvious flaring in places.

 

[fidget]

Thanks for your posts. So the fog in my film base is probably a feature of that base, rather than a fault in my film or process?
Mango, thanks for posting the test shots. I had read about a simple test to determine a film speed and dev time for my setup. I wonder if it's right:
.........shoot 3 sets of three frames of a scene with average contrast including some shadow areas where content is wanted. Each set has frames exposed at normal, plus one stop, minus one stop. Soup sets as normal, n+1 and n-1 dev. Determine which combination is the one which I am happy with. .....Being a noob at this, I thought that this would give one of the same negative from each batch as the change in development will compensate for the change in film speed. ....I know that this is too simplistic and that the film will "favour" a particular speed for my kit/processing, but how to recognise this? You can probably tell that I haven't done this test yet, but I have varied the processing and speed for several rolls. Seems to suit more exposure and dev times higher that those suggested so far. This is a shame as this film is quite grainy but has the advantage of being 400, to use at 200 sort of defeats the intent.

....oops! a bit OT.....
Dave..