Neopan 400 @1600 - pretty magical

U

user237428934

User deletion pending
Local time
2:00 PM
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
2,669
This is my 4th self developed film. Tried Neopan 400 @1600 to catch some light and shadow in the city. For me the result is pretty magical. I like the contrast very much. Zeiss Ikon + Biogon 35









 
Nice stuff! Do you have the Biogon f/2 or 2.8? Considering one. I really like my Planar 50mm f/2.
 
thats nice contrast, I'm sure the biogon was instrumental as well. I've been told that Neopan 1600 is actually Neo 400 pushed X2 when deveoped at the lab, which I think is what you have done. I've also seen breathless highlights for Neo 1600 in Rodinal. Keep up the good work
 
raytoei@gmail.com said:
Tom,

Very nice indeed. can i ask what are your development times and which developer did you use ?

thanks
Click to expand...

I've chosen Tetenal Ultrafin Plus because I wanted something liquid. Little cheaper than HC-110. According to the description of the developer I mixed 1+4 and did 12min for Neopan at 1600 with agitation every 3 sec. That's quite a lot agitating in 12 minutes :) Tried a film before with less agitating but it was underdeveloped.

Edit: in the meatime I recogniced that the Tetenal is cheaper for a 1l bottle but you can non dilute it as much as HC 110.
 
Last edited:
totifoto said:
these look good, like the last one a lot ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks. Two seconds before it even looked better because the two persons were 1m nearer and the shadow looked better. But before I had time to lift the camera to the eye and focus the shadow was almost gone.
 
umcelinho said:
Slightly OT, but I'm shooting Neopan 1600 @ 6400. Curious to see what it can do also pushed 2 stops.
Click to expand...

That would be interesting... I'd like to see a direct print from those negatives: It's a near 4 stop push... If you really meter at 6400 (different from setting camera at 6400 and shooting any scene as if it was middle gray) most of reality's tones will become black no matter the developer used: it's about the light the film requires... The film is ISO500-640, and designed for strong contrast when pushed to 1600... If it's really shot at 6400, even skin should be dark... Of course if you scan and like wild contrast and use photoshop, you'll get an image... I use P1600 for its grain and look, but ISO400 films push better... Please don't take me wrong: I'd really like to see the results... Thanks!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Neopan 1600 is def not Neo 400 pushed two stops.

Neopan 1600 is about 2/3 to a stop faster in real speed dealt with like for like.

IMHO, these shots would have been stronger with Neopan 1600 due to pulling out more shadow detail. I find these examples a little blown in the highlights and blocked up in the shadows. This would be reduced with the faster film, but to be sure, Neopan 1600 never makes 1600 in any developer.... Its a wonderful film used within its limits, which for me is 500 in very contrasty light with high contrast lenses and about 800 in dead flat light.
 
Nice. I especially like the first, second, and fourth. Good detail in the open areas, good deep blacks to set them off. Some blowing of highlights is expected and acceptable in night shots. But when set off by the blacks, it usually works well. I really like how you even got what I guess is a mannequin in the upper window of the fourth. Nice job.
 
LOVE, LOVE, LOVE IT Tom !!!!
Rich Sexy Blacks....Picture PURRFECT Lushness

I do that w/ Trix either to 800 or 1600 quite Often
Cheers- H
 
Hmm... interesting.

I can see how these can be appealing from an aesthetic point of view. I like them.

I can't see myself using Neopan 400 @ 1600 but that doesn't mean squat because I'm using it for a different purpose.

These are the stuff fine art can be made of.

Good stuff Tom - it's always good to see people trying out different things with the different types of film !! :)

Cheers,
Dave
 
oftheherd said:
Nice. I especially like the first, second, and fourth. Good detail in the open areas, good deep blacks to set them off. Some blowing of highlights is expected and acceptable in night shots. But when set off by the blacks, it usually works well. I really like how you even got what I guess is a mannequin in the upper window of the fourth. Nice job.
Click to expand...

Not a mannequin :) It's a statue from 1650: "The seven sorrows of mary"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom