Canonet & Ilford PANF 50 Plus

S

schrackman

Established
Local time
2:45 PM
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
156
Location
Redding, CA
View My Gallery
I'm not sure if this scan is accurate, as I scanned it without using my negative film holder (kinda lost it). I'm wondering if this is how PANF 50 normally looks or should there be a bit more contrast involved? At least I know the lens is tack sharp.

This is my youngest daughter, by the way, who is always willing to pose for dad.🙂
 

Attachments

  • Adrienne1.jpg
    Adrienne1.jpg
    162.9 KB · Views: 0
Looks nice. That's the look I usually get - I use that film all the time (I got about 10 more rolls in the fridge, and a 100ft bulk roll to go).

Your result looks a lot nicer than mine usually does. I haven't yet tweaked my developing well enough 😉
 
IMO, any film should look like however you want it, based on exposure and development. So yes that's how it can look, and no that's not the only way it can look.

allan
 
That's a very nice image - great tonality.

BTW, Pan F is on special at Freestyle Photo (www.freestylephoto.biz) for $12 for a 100' roll. It's their house-brand Arista Professional 50 (which is rebranded Pan F). It's post-dated from February. I've got three 100' rolls in the freezer.
 
Right does anyone in the UK want to go in on ordering a whole load from the US? I fancy about 2 or 3 tins worth, but I think if 2 more people chipped in then postage and duty tax would be covered more easily.
 
Ash said:
Right does anyone in the UK want to go in on ordering a whole load from the US? I fancy about 2 or 3 tins worth, but I think if 2 more people chipped in then postage and duty tax would be covered more easily.
Click to expand...

You won't pay duty - it's a British product. You will pay VAT though.
 
Thanks for your comments, everyone. I was a bit worried that something was either up with the development of the film or the scan itself. I borrowed a negative holder from work today but as it turns out the negatives are better scanned without it. I'll try to post a couple more examples a bit later.
 
Well, here's a couple more from the same roll. After scanning all my negatives it appears the great majority of them were underexposed. I had relied on my meter for this roll as I wanted to see how accurate it is. Looks like I got lucky on only about five exposures altogether.

The first two of my oldest daughter, and the last one is with me and her (taken by my youngest daughter).
 

Attachments

  • Melanie2.jpg
    Melanie2.jpg
    145.6 KB · Views: 0
  • Melanie1.jpg
    Melanie1.jpg
    137.5 KB · Views: 0
  • dad&Mel.jpg
    dad&Mel.jpg
    132.3 KB · Views: 0
Hi Schrackman,

I have found Ilford Pan 50 to behave like a more "normal" (and sometimes flat) type of film in terms of contrast; FP4 and HP5 are more contrasty. So, the tonality you have is very nice, I think. If you want more contrast like FP4 and HP5, then set the ASA on the Canonet to 25 and get a new battery for the meter. Or, use a handhheld meter and shoot as if the film is ASA 25. Process the film normally; do not pull or shorten the development time. You should then get more contrast, if this is something you are looking for.

But I think the shots look beautiful. In the second image, there is white in her sneakers as well as some white on her cheek. The overall tonality of the greys are smooth and buttery....so, they look good! 🙂

Cheers,

Chris
canonetc
 
i think those shots are fantastic - good exposures and the grain is silky smooth and the tones are great. plus, you've got a great, sharp Canonet. what f-stop were you shooting these at?

also, if you're looking for just a tad more contrast from these images, you might want to check the black and white points in Levels in Photoshop. i grabbed one of your pics, and made these quick adjustments - resulting in just a bit more contrast. was this more along the lines of what you were hoping for?
 

Attachments

  • Melanie1.jpg
    Melanie1.jpg
    52.9 KB · Views: 0
Hi Chris,

canonetc said:
Hi Schrackman,

I have found Ilford Pan 50 to behave like a more "normal" (and sometimes flat) type of film in terms of contrast; FP4 and HP5 are more contrasty. So, the tonality you have is very nice, I think.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am satisfied with the above images as they are. However, for certain types of photos I would like a higher contrast film. I just didn't know how constrasty the Pan 50 was supposed to be. I'm a newbie film, mind you. 😛 But I'll definitely keep the above films in mind when I want more constrast.

If you want more contrast like FP4 and HP5, then set the ASA on the Canonet to 25 and get a new battery for the meter. Or, use a handhheld meter and shoot as if the film is ASA 25. Process the film normally; do not pull or shorten the development time. You should then get more contrast, if this is something you are looking for.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...I've been wondering what would happen if I set the ASA lower than the film speed. I'll have to give this a try now.

But I think the shots look beautiful. In the second image, there is white in her sneakers as well as some white on her cheek. The overall tonality of the greys are smooth and buttery....so, they look good! 🙂
Click to expand...

Well thank you. I think those two of my daughters were the best exposed out of the whole roll. I'm gonna have to give Pan 50 another chance now that I know somewhat how it behaves.
 
Canonet and Ilford Pan 50

Canonet and Ilford Pan 50

Hi, you might also try Freestyle's "Arista 50". Attached is an image, scanned from a print. I rated it at ASA 25 and processed it in Rodinol 1:25.


Chris
canonetc
 

Attachments

  • Wake05Clee.jpg
    Wake05Clee.jpg
    241.7 KB · Views: 0
sockdaddy said:
i think those shots are fantastic - good exposures and the grain is silky smooth and the tones are great. plus, you've got a great, sharp Canonet. what f-stop were you shooting these at?
Click to expand...

Thanks, sockdaddy (why do I feel weird saying that? LOL). I can't remember the f-stop setting. I set my Canonet to A, and the shutter was either set to 250 or 500. Can't remember. I swore I was gonna write down all my settings on this roll but I got too busy shooting and didn't do it.

also, if you're looking for just a tad more contrast from these images, you might want to check the black and white points in Levels in Photoshop. i grabbed one of your pics, and made these quick adjustments - resulting in just a bit more contrast. was this more along the lines of what you were hoping for?
Click to expand...

Well now that I have an idea how this film behaves, I prefer the original version. I kinda like the silky, smooth appearance it gives as opposed to a medium to high contrasted look. At least for these photographs anyways. In terms of higher contrast I think I would like to achieve something to the effect like Zorkikat's "Monkeymonger." Recently there was also a photo on the gallery of a man sitting on some steps, very contrasty and grainy. Can't remember whose it was or what it was called, but I loved it.
 
So many films to choose from! And now I have to think about different developing processes? LOL Well, I don't know a thing about processing, but my oldest daughter does. I think I'll be enlisting her help in the near future. This film stuff is addictive!

That's a great photo by the way, Chris.

canonetc said:
Hi, you might also try Freestyle's "Arista 50". Attached is an image, scanned from a print. I rated it at ASA 25 and processed it in Rodinol 1:25.


Chris
canonetc
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom