Pan F 50/Pushing

[astrosecret]

Anybody here pushed Pan F plus to 100, 200 or even 400?

Kind of short notice but I want to try this tomorrow, if anybody has any opinions on how it might look/if it's worth it. photos would be awesome! Would appreciate any input, even about 35, but I'll be shooting 120.

 

[Trius]

I wouldn't do it, but that's just me. Pan F doesn't seem to have the latitude to push, though others may have done it successfully. I'd bet 1 stop would be max.

My question? Why?

 

[astrosecret]

I was going to say, i've shot with pan f in 35 before and the images were kind of flat, very contrasty-so i wouldn't think of going over one stop. but if anybody has any other experience, i'd like to hear about it.

I'm crewing on a film tomorrow and the only film i have at my disposal is pan f... some areas might be hard to get an exposure at even with 100 speed. it's this abandoned house, which has become a run down hippie/cult gathering for some time now... should be an interesting loc.

 

[Bryce]

What Trius said.
Pan F gets very contrasty even developed to box speed, so at least for wet printing you'll be printing on the lowest grade and wishing for more. Scanned negatives might be easier.
Post results with specifics if you try it!

 

[rpsawin]

You would be better off using FP4+ and pushing it or using HP5+ and pulling as needed.

Bob

 

[Freakscene]

Some (including the massive development chart) claim that Pan F+'s speed in Diafine is 100. Years ago when I tried it, I found that 40 worked for me. Pan F+ did not work very well for me at the box speed, let alone any faster. FP4+ worked well for me at 250 in Diafine. All the negs are archived and would take too long to find; sorry I can't be of more help.

Marty

 

[MartinP]

In terms of density, I think you would be using a tiny part of the curve down where it is almost flat especially if you try to go more than one stop. Not a plan for normal pictorial photography. Scanning rather than real printing might be necessary and even then it would look very strange, likely all thin grey tones and black shadows, which would be hard to rescue even with using the curves tools.

I suppose this is one of those times where one wishes that there was always at least ten rolls of HP5+ or Tri-X in the fridge as a reserve . . . .

If you can scrounge a digital camera of some sort then "any pictures are better than no pictures", but maybe turn off the auto-flash - unless a harsh weak flash could add to the feel ?!

Good luck.

 

[mr_phillip]

I've pushed Pan-F to 100asa before (by mistake I might add). I developed it in DD-X and, while the results were ok, it's not something I'd recommend unless you absolutely had to. There's a slight lift in visible grain, but the contrast is high and you lose a lot of tonality. Example:

More examples here...

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Well if Pan F is all you've got, it's all you've got. I'd bring a table top tripod if you have one. I'd second what was said above - Pan f is not the film to chose if you are going to be push processing. If you must push it, try the following. Shoot a roll at 200 and, instead of just plunging on to the development stage, then shoot a "test" roll under similar conditions to the ones you've already shot in. Choose a dilute developer combination and, in the darkroom, cut the test roll into, say, four strips and develop each strip for a different amount of time. Make your educated pushing guess based on your results. The only worse negative than an under-developed, over-developed or hard-to-print negative is no negative at all.

 

[astrosecret]

Thanks. looks like i'll be shooting at 100, and some 35mm with the remaining 200asa i have. I think if i shoot at 100 i should be able to fix some of the contrast issues with filters in the darkroom, no?

 

[40oz]

I say give it a shot, and good luck. It's just film, and it's made to be bent to your will. So what if someone thinks the images are "too cantrasty," or "lost some tonality." It's always better to get the shot than to say "some guy on the internet told me it wouldn't work, so I didn't try." 🙂

 

[sepiareverb]

Pan F is for pulling. Shoot it at 50 and accept the slow shutter speed.

 

[Trius]

I agree that Pan F is more like EI 40 or even 32, depending on scene. But if it's all you have, Ian's results with DD-X aren't too bad. Ilford doesn't list any push processing times for Pan F. The Massive Dev chart doesn't have a lot of help for common developers at anything over EI 100, and few at that. The common developers listed for EI 200 are Microphen & XTOL, with XTOL listing EI 400 as follows:

Dil..........EI......Time
stock.....400.......10
1+1.......400.......13
1+2.......400.....15.5
1+3.......400.....18.5

all @ 20C.

 

[venchka]

Good grief. You can pick up Kodak BW400CN at any drugstore or supermarket or Wal-Mart. CVS even has Tri-X on occasion. Fuji Superia 400 or 800 are common too. You can always convert the color to B&W in Lightroom or Photoshop. Right tool for the job you know.

 

[sepiareverb]

So, how'd it go?

 

[Trius]

Wayne: And I've even heard that Wally-World has T-Max 400.

 

[astrosecret]

i'm sure all drug stores have 400CN film. However, not in 120 size...

It went well. I was shooting with a TLR so i only made about 10 exposures, and i'm going to soup them sometime this week. Hopefully I'll get them scanned when i go back to chicago in a couple weeks (every pro photo place in nyc is outrageously high priced). Someone mentioned it might be pretty hard to save in the darkroom, so i'm just gonna save some paper and get em scanned. stay tuned...

 

[venchka]

Good For You!

Good For You!

i'm sure all drug stores have 400CN film. However, not in 120 size...

It went well. I was shooting with a TLR so i only made about 10 exposures, and i'm going to soup them sometime this week. Hopefully I'll get them scanned when i go back to chicago in a couple weeks (every pro photo place in nyc is outrageously high priced). Someone mentioned it might be pretty hard to save in the darkroom, so i'm just gonna save some paper and get em scanned. stay tuned...

Sorry. I missed the 120 film requirement.

 

[venchka]

Maybe close to Rochester?

Maybe close to Rochester?

Wayne: And I've even heard that Wally-World has T-Max 400.

I went to Wally World the day before Thanksgiving looking for the t-MAX 400 for me and DVD players for the granddaughters. Nope. No t-MAX 400. I did score the last 6 rolls of Kodak 400 UC. The boxes were dirty, crumpled and one was taped shut. I asked for a discount. "Would $5 each be ok?"

YUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!