Ferrania P30 B&W Film Thread

sepiareverb said:
x-ray, here are some iPhone shots of my films. Fluorescent noise with the phone camera, films are a consistent slightly purplish-grey. Contrasty. This was shot on a morning walk down to the Post Office and drugstore yesterday. Clear blue sky, but early enough that there was open shade from buildings. I went back out about two hours later and finished off the last six frames here. I would have gotten 40 frames, but am glad I didn't go to the very end, as when I unspooled the film in the darkroom it came right off the center, seems like the hole in the film didn't get caught by the tooth in the spindle.









Missed the focus in that last one, if you want to see it again let me know.

Taming the highlights while getting more shadow detail would be what I'd need to figure out to make use of this more often. And this was a contrasty morning for this stuff, but I would often be shooting a 50 speed film on a day like this. With the lack of shadow detail in so much of the P30 stuff I've seen (I've looked at tons of it on Flickr and Facebook besides what's been posted here) I bracketed at 1 over, ½ over and my normal metering for these scenes.

PanF+ seems the closest in tonality to me from this first test. Similar shadow density concerns there (I shoot PanF+ at 40). I've also not used Ilfosol 3 before at all, so I don't know how much of my contrast trouble is coming from the developer. I'm interested enough to want more, but that's because it seems to be a slower film than the 80 stated and there are not a lot of slow options now that my stash of Efke25 is evaporating...
Click to expand...

I purchased some P30 and shot a roll today. I shot at ISO 80 in contrasty mid day light and processed per recommendations in my standard developer HC110 B at 68f. I did my normal 5 inversions every 30 seconds. I had fears of flat negs but found the negs to be pretty contrasty. They pretty much look like yours. Shadows were thin to none and highlights were dense to blocked.

One observation is this film is very fine grained in HC110 and tonality is very smooth. As you mentioned the negs remind me of Pan F+.

I bracket my exposures by + 1/2 and 1 over. I suspected shadows might be a problem as I print on an Ilford MG diffusion head and prefer full shadows with plenty of detail. Highlights aren't a huge issue if they're not blocked. I actually like a neg a touch on the beefy side.

I think next roll I'm going to bracket again and dilute my HC110 1:47 like I do with FP4 and will run 5 min at 68f with the same agitation.

I have the raw chemicals and may mix some D96 for another roll and maybe give D76 a try.

I have a halon of Mic X from Freestyle and may develop in that at EI 40 and do it by inspection. Anyone tried Mic X.

I think this is a promising film when I get the shadow density up and contrast down.
 
X-Ray
this description ( purchased some P30 and shot a roll today. I shot at ISO 80 in contrasty mid day light and processed per recommendations in my standard developer HC110 B at 68f. I did my normal 5 inversions every 30 seconds. I had fears of flat negs but found the negs to be pretty contrasty. They pretty much look like yours. Shadows were thin to none and highlights were dense to blocked) points toward film that is underexposed and over developed. You might try exposing a roll at ASA 40 and cutting back the development time 15-20 percent.
 
Thanks for the tip on Ilfosol 3. I've never used any so it'll be interesting.

I'll give HC110 another try at 1:47 rather than cut the time. 5 min was the time I used and that's about as short as I like to go for consistency.

Since it's silver rich I thought I'd give some PMK pyro a shot. I've used it with FP4 with great results and gotten very good negs with Pan F. Due to silver content it might be an ideal film.
 
My roll above was run in Ilfosol3, which I got in for the P30. Ferrania notes D96 as their preferred developer, will get to mix that up today, and my latest roll is nearly all shot.

I wonder how much the tech sheet times are aimed at scanning rather than a wet print?
 
My film came Friday too. I was wondering what was up since there was no shipping notice. Probably going in my N90S.

Did you notice the metal cartridge has a Ferrania label on it? I peeled one off, and underneath the cartridge is labelled as Rollei Ortho 25. Hmmm... I figure they are using up some old-stock cartridges.
 
I could live forever with some of the results I was getting earlier with D76, but am looking forward to seeing results people are getting with D96 and PMK, both of which I already have. If people can best those with Ilfosol 3, maybe that as well. I know I like the film, will be nice to settle on a developer. Will also give Perceptol a try.
 
sepiareverb said:
........I wonder how much the tech sheet times are aimed at scanning rather than a wet print?
Click to expand...

Good question. The times on the Preferred Practices PDF are based on what what people are finding through their own experiments, not any scientific testing on Ferrania’s part. The images on the P30 website are, of course, all scanned, so maybe the optimal developer and development times are for scanning and not printing?

Jim B.
 
Mackinaw said:
Good question. The times on the Preferred Practices PDF are based on what what people are finding through their own experiments, not any scientific testing on Ferrania’s part. The images on the P30 website are, of course, all scanned, so maybe the optimal developer and development times are for scanning and not printing?

Jim B.
Click to expand...

The quality of information always concerns me because you never know the technical level of the person giving the info. At best it's a starting point. Too, a good neg for wet printing will produce a very good scan. Scanner profiles are aimed at well processed and exposed negs that would yield ideal wet prints.
 
D96 is mixed, and cooling. Added a tiny bit of extra KBr, hope that tames the contrast a touch.

Mixed up some ID-3 as well. Made up a Borax bath as well for some further compensating with the ID-3, from the Photographer's Formulary version of ID-3, which uses a Borax second bath for 3 minutes after development.

So damn cold here I will only have one roll to run tomorrow (or maybe Monday), was going to finish up the first roll and shoot a second but gave up after finishing the first one.
 
x-ray said:
...Too, a good neg for wet printing will produce a very good scan. Scanner profiles are aimed at well processed and exposed negs that would yield ideal wet prints.
Click to expand...

Having made wet prints for people who only scan their film I conclude that many 'scan only' folks make much worse negatives (for wet printing) than us wet-printers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mos6502
Ferrania P33, first roll, and some observations.
2 3
Replies
53
Views
6K
luuca
luuca
M
New, Improved Polaroid B&W Film now Available
Replies
14
Views
2K
Oren Grad
O
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
Timmyjoe
Timmyjoe
J
  • Article Article
The Pentax Papers, Part 3, from the Super A of 1983 to the *ist of 2003: great shooters often overlooked.
Replies
11
Views
2K
ChrisPlatt
ChrisPlatt
J
  • Article Article
The Pentax Papers, part 2, K-mount 35mm SLRs, 1975 to 1980. From the first K-mount K2 to the magnificent pro caliber Pentax LX
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
Archiver
A
Back
Top Bottom