Neopan 1600 in HC110 - take III

[alexz]

Well, following Lazar's Tri-X pushing adventure...I'm continuing my Neopan 1600 in HC110 saga....
My last Neopna 1600/HC100 thread exhibited less then successful results trying Neopan exposed at 1600 in HC110 dillution H for 14 minutes with moderate agitation at 20 deg. C.
The results proved to be extremely contrasty to an unacceptable level and beyond which probably hinted about overdevelopment.
To eliminate the possibility of exposure error, I re-shoot another 10-12 frames watching proper metering and exp. setting, developed in similar solution and obtained similar, severly overcontrasty, unusable results.

Now, at my third attempt I reduced development time to 11.5 minutes, moderate agitation (3 turns at 2 minutes-long intervals), dill. H at 20 deg.C. The results are considerably better and certainly usable, through yet still probably a bit too contrasty to my liking. I'm not sure whether additional dev. time reduction is a worthy approach to follow (say to reduce from 11.5 minuts to 11 or even 10.5 minutes) or probably weaken up even more my agitation ?
Or probaly this is about as good as can be achieved from Neopan 1600 (when shot at 1600) in HC110 ?
Also, it seems to be quite grainy, cosniderably harsher then I used to with Tri-X @400 in HC110...perhaps this is natural and somethign to get expected from Neopan 1600 ?

Attached are few examples from that roll:

P.S. images are downsized but not sharpened deliberately to avoid artificially raising contrast

 

[alexz]

another few:

 

[alexz]

additonal:

 

[cole]

Alexz - I can't comment too much as to where to go with respect to continuing your experiments, as I believe I mentioned in a previous thread that my results have been quite adequate in my Neopan/HC110 experiences.

I do quite like your shots, though - very nicely done. I especially like the 2nd shot in the third set, it's quite magical, to use perhaps too fluffy a word.

I don't find the contrast to be at all objectionable - but then, that's just my taste. I can see from a technical standpoint where you would be frustrated. I've always shot Neopan to exploit its inherent contrast - it is by nature a very contrasty film, as I'm sure you're becoming aware.

With respect to the grain - Neopan 1600 has a very unique characteristic grain structure, and it is quite prominent. This isn't down to anything on your end, it's the film itself. I've noticed it across several different developers, and it's something that most people who have used the film either love or hate.

At any rate, nice work on the photographs, and good luck in the continuing 'saga.'

 

[alexz]

Thanks Cole, that second shot in the third set is my favorite as well, perhaps of that timeless kind where even exxagerated contrast doesn't matter to convey the feeling...
I have forth experimental roll loaded in my M6 - will try yet to fine tune the development by reducing the time for another half minute...

 

[charjohncarter]

The third shot of the third set shows a good contrast to me. But I like that type of contrast. I have never used this film, but it does seem like a high contrast film. Maybe its best use is with low contrast subjects like 3/3. I find that to be the case with PlusX, but I have it down now so I can use it in full sun.

 

[alexz]

Thanks John.
In fact, my approach targets high speed films for the situations where it is unavoidable exposure-wise, mostly indoors, events, etc... i.e. when contrasty or even harsh lighting is typical. Hence I'd look for the film featured by moderate contrast.
The third image in third set rendered the kettle blindly dark (at the right side), but in reality it is dark blue, quite distinguishable frrom black.

BTW, I have also made a few endeavors on PlusX some time ago and also got he feeling how contrasty it is, so I dropped one from my usage list.. (replaced by TriX derated to 200)

 

[Trius]

IMO it is an exposure problem. Downrate to 1250 or 1000 and see what happens. I wouldn't decrease development until you try a lower EI first.

 

[alexz]

So, Truis, do you think Neopan 1600 should be really exposed about a half stop slower ?

 

[john_s]

The super speed films (Kodak, Ilford and Fuji) are all named after speeds that are well over their true ISO speed. They are designed to tolerate extra development to give useful high speeds, but not with what I would call proper shadow detail. For example, Kodak and Ilford 3200 are actually ISO 1000 or thereabouts.

According to Fuji's data sheets, Neopan 1600 is 2/3 of one stop faster than Neopan 400, based on the shadow-detail end of the scale. This makes its true ISO speed 640. To get it to a pseudo-1600, contrast is going to get high.

Whether that is going to be satisfactory, it depends on the subject and the look you want. You might get a bit more speed out of Xtol instead of HC-110.

 

[Bob Michaels]

The results proved to be extremely contrasty to an unacceptable level and beyond which probably hinted about overdevelopment.

Extremely contrasty does not "hint" at overdevelopment. It shouts overdevelopment loud and clear.

I've shot a bit of the Neopan 1600. I usually develop it in DDX although I have used HC110 sometimes. I don't find it overcontrasty, even when I push the development time about 20% more to make it work at e.i. 1600.

But you also will never get a real e.i. of 1600, normal grain, a perfect tonal scale, and perfect contrast out of any film. You've got to give up something to get that speed.

The good news is that if you are really having to shoot at an e.i. of 1600, the scene is a somewhat abnormal in the lighting anyway. So you can deal with that.

 

[alexz]

Yes, I see, thanks.
The current experimental roll gets shot a half stop slower then for 1600, i.e. at approx. 1250.
I'll process one in the same regime as did the previous one hoping to yield better results. Will report back then.

 

[Teus]

W
The results proved to be extremely contrasty to an unacceptable level and beyond which probably hinted about overdevelopment.

HC-110 is a developer with an upswept curve. It's doesn't increase speed, is a bit contrastier and makes for a poor push developer. You will be much happier with XTOL for example: less grain and much better tonality.

I also made the error of pushing film with unsuitable developers... and wait, didn't I post about this before?

 

[Trius]

What everyone has said ... HC-110 is a beautiful developer, but when I used it for TX (older emulsion) I rated the TX @ 200. I.e., it does not provide a lot of shadow detail at box speed (at least with some films), though @ 200 the TX was beautiful with lots of midrange and highlight separation, and pretty good acutance & grain.

Neopan 1600 does very well in D-76 1:1; look at some of Telenous' Neopan 1600 shots on flickr. His shots convinced me that Neopan 1600 can be a really interesting film in D-76. But it still isn't a true 1600 speed film, IMO.

 

[charjohncarter]

I have to say that Trius summed it up perfectly. HC-110 is a great developer, but you have to use it for its intended purpose. Another developer, for instance, I like Tmax100 shot at 50 and developed in Rodinal, but I really wasn't that happy with it shot at 100.

You seem to like to try lots of developer/film combinations, here is a site with plenty:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/bw_film-dev_combinations/discuss/80107/

 

[alexz]

Thanks guys, those are valuable information and opinions.
As I'll gain a bit more experience with HC110 I'll probably agree that it is not the best choice for high speed films and will keep is mainly for my regular shooting (which I do Tri-X at 400, sometimes at 200) but will establish the approach to high speed films probably with Microphen.
Have yet tried the latter one, but from what I hear and read here and there, I realize this one is also high-speed intended developer, just like DD-X. Besides, I hope it may also be wiser choice to use one for occasional Tri-X pushing.

I have a co-worker wedding coming on in 2 weeks from now (actually of his daughter) so considered to establish my approach with Neopan 1600 till then to shoot a few rolls of flash-less stuff there...otherwise Tri-X, probably pushed to 800 will be handy...

 

[Teus]

tri-x at 800 in XTOL or TMAX is great. use P3200 (kodak tmz) for the real high-speed stuff.