Bill58
Native Texan
Has anybody used this stuff? They say it's a vintage look (like old Tri-X) and it's cheap.
Bill
Bill
J & C Photo Classic 400 film?
- Thread starter Bill58
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 15
- Views 1K
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
I have a batch of the Classic 200, but I haven't developed any yet
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
The price certainly seems right! What is it, rebranded Efke?
drmatthes
Zeiss Addict
I have used Classic 400 quite a bit. In Germany, a good source is www.fotoimpex.de. I was also looking for a vintage look with some softness and still good contrast at a cheap price. The stuff is said to come from Hungary, being the same as Fortepan 400. I do not develop myself but sent the film in to one of Fuji's mega-labs in Northern Germany.
At ISO 400, I was a bit disappointed by the low overall contrast, whereas shadow differentiation was very good. This may be due to the super-panchromatic sensitization of the emulsion, i.e. enhanced red-light susceptibility.
As I like available light situations a lot, I took pictures at ISO 800 at a Jazz club in Berlin, and had the film pushed by one stop in the same lab. In my opinion the results were excellent, nice "vintage" grain and still good shadow detail, plus good contrast at that speed.
So that's way to treat this film properly without a darkroom of your own, shoot at ISO 800 and have it pushed by one stop.
Perhaps I can try and scan two or three examples later today if I can find the time to do so (for the time being, I'm off to a tie-and-lounge-suit event that might well be a bore compared to hanging around at RFF...)
Jesko
At ISO 400, I was a bit disappointed by the low overall contrast, whereas shadow differentiation was very good. This may be due to the super-panchromatic sensitization of the emulsion, i.e. enhanced red-light susceptibility.
As I like available light situations a lot, I took pictures at ISO 800 at a Jazz club in Berlin, and had the film pushed by one stop in the same lab. In my opinion the results were excellent, nice "vintage" grain and still good shadow detail, plus good contrast at that speed.
So that's way to treat this film properly without a darkroom of your own, shoot at ISO 800 and have it pushed by one stop.
Perhaps I can try and scan two or three examples later today if I can find the time to do so (for the time being, I'm off to a tie-and-lounge-suit event that might well be a bore compared to hanging around at RFF...)
Jesko
drmatthes
Zeiss Addict
Bill58
Native Texan
Jesko:
I shoot outdoors 95%--mostly people. Should I use a yellow or other filter? Also set ASA dial at 400 and processing according to J & C specs?
The original of your Avatar is awesome--thanks for sharing w/ me.
Many thanks,
Bill
I shoot outdoors 95%--mostly people. Should I use a yellow or other filter? Also set ASA dial at 400 and processing according to J & C specs?
The original of your Avatar is awesome--thanks for sharing w/ me.
Many thanks,
Bill
drmatthes
Zeiss Addict
Bill,
I'm afraid I can't quite answer that one properly. As I have mentioned, I found the film a bit low in contrast when shot at ASA 400 and developed at Fuji's in whatever soup they used. I am an amateur and have no darkroom experience.
From a theoretical viewpoint, the film is a super-pan already, so adding a yellow filter might enhance the problems with people/portraits. Skin tones might be too flat. Yellow filters in red-susceptible films are good for hiding skin problems. So if you shoot pimply girls they will be glad with the results😉 . For a very characteristic portrait of an old man (like me?) it may be wiser to use a blue filter that enhances all the little marks life leaves behind on us.
So, trial (and error?) might be the best way to test it.
I dunno whether there is a discussion forum about that at www.fotoimpex.us, but there is one at www.fotoimpex.de. I will try and check this out for you because the stuff is in German. I'm off to an on-call duty:angel: for the time being, but I'll be back.
Regards,
Jesko
I'm afraid I can't quite answer that one properly. As I have mentioned, I found the film a bit low in contrast when shot at ASA 400 and developed at Fuji's in whatever soup they used. I am an amateur and have no darkroom experience.
From a theoretical viewpoint, the film is a super-pan already, so adding a yellow filter might enhance the problems with people/portraits. Skin tones might be too flat. Yellow filters in red-susceptible films are good for hiding skin problems. So if you shoot pimply girls they will be glad with the results😉 . For a very characteristic portrait of an old man (like me?) it may be wiser to use a blue filter that enhances all the little marks life leaves behind on us.
So, trial (and error?) might be the best way to test it.
I dunno whether there is a discussion forum about that at www.fotoimpex.us, but there is one at www.fotoimpex.de. I will try and check this out for you because the stuff is in German. I'm off to an on-call duty:angel: for the time being, but I'll be back.
Regards,
Jesko
Bill58
Native Texan
Jesko:
Many thanks--I've got 30 rolls coming to me.
Bill
Many thanks--I've got 30 rolls coming to me.
Bill
R
ray_g
Guest
And it looks like an ASA 25 is coming too. Appears we'll have film around for some time longer. 😉
http://www.jandcphoto.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=31
http://www.jandcphoto.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=31
oftheherd
Veteran
ray_g said:
Now that's awesome. Thanks for the link.
drmatthes
Zeiss Addict
Addition:
www.fotolaborforum.de offers an English discussion forum about films like Efke/Adox, Foma, and Classic plus the different developers etc.; logging in might be a bit tricky (or, sorry, idiotic, like it is to offer an English forum without an English login procedure) as this is in German, but basically, you hit "English Foto-Lab-Forum", then "Für Gäste:Zur Registrierung", go to the botom of the page, tick the box with "Ich habe den vorstehenden Text..." and hit "Ich möchte mich nun registrieren". Understood...?
One will find lots of folks there who use these films on a regular basis. Not a very busy forum, though.
Jesko
www.fotolaborforum.de offers an English discussion forum about films like Efke/Adox, Foma, and Classic plus the different developers etc.; logging in might be a bit tricky (or, sorry, idiotic, like it is to offer an English forum without an English login procedure) as this is in German, but basically, you hit "English Foto-Lab-Forum", then "Für Gäste:Zur Registrierung", go to the botom of the page, tick the box with "Ich habe den vorstehenden Text..." and hit "Ich möchte mich nun registrieren". Understood...?
One will find lots of folks there who use these films on a regular basis. Not a very busy forum, though.
Jesko
Diggin99
Established
Thanks Jesko! Looks like an interesting fourm...and god bless Babelfish...was able to register with a little help!
Nancy
Nancy
drmatthes said:
jdef
luxologist
Hi Bill.
I've shot a lot of this film, in various formats from 120 through 8x10, mostly available light portraits, with no filter. This film doesn't build contrast as quickly as most films, so underdevelopment is always a possibility, especially by labs not accustomed to processing this film. Jesko's description of his impressions of the film exposed at EI 400 certainly ring of underdevelopment, and his impressions of the same film push-processed seem to bear that out. If you have your film processed by a lab, you might consider exposing normally, and push processing. If you're processing your own film, a little testing will tell what you need to know about exposure and development. This film is fairly grainy, more so than TX, which is one reason I don't shoot it in 35mm, preferring instead Tmax 400. The attached image is from a scan of an 8x10 print, made from a 120 Forte 400 negative developed for 70 seconds in my Rapid Universal developer. There are some scanner artefacts caused, I think, from the curl in the FB paper, but the print is very nice. The subject is my daughter, Kaya. Enjoy your film!
Jay
I've shot a lot of this film, in various formats from 120 through 8x10, mostly available light portraits, with no filter. This film doesn't build contrast as quickly as most films, so underdevelopment is always a possibility, especially by labs not accustomed to processing this film. Jesko's description of his impressions of the film exposed at EI 400 certainly ring of underdevelopment, and his impressions of the same film push-processed seem to bear that out. If you have your film processed by a lab, you might consider exposing normally, and push processing. If you're processing your own film, a little testing will tell what you need to know about exposure and development. This film is fairly grainy, more so than TX, which is one reason I don't shoot it in 35mm, preferring instead Tmax 400. The attached image is from a scan of an 8x10 print, made from a 120 Forte 400 negative developed for 70 seconds in my Rapid Universal developer. There are some scanner artefacts caused, I think, from the curl in the FB paper, but the print is very nice. The subject is my daughter, Kaya. Enjoy your film!
Jay
Attachments
VictorM.
Well-known
70 second development!? What about agitation?
jdef
luxologist
Hi Victor.
Agitation was continuous, gentle, inversion agitation in a daylight tank.
Jay
Agitation was continuous, gentle, inversion agitation in a daylight tank.
Jay
Uncle Bill
Well-known
- Local time
- 10:42 AM
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
- Messages
- 1,077
I rated a roll of classicpan 400 at 400 processed at 14 minutes with Rodinal 1:50. Now I have been told you can get better results if you pull down to 200 and process for 11 instead of 14. I am trying it, I love the look and the price.
Bill
Bill
Similar threads
