Pan F+, limited tonal range in D-76

[Sid836]

I have been shooting Ilford's Pan F+ for a while and developing it in D-76. I have used D-76 in 1+3 for 15 minutes at 20 degC, but the negatives come out with a limited tonal range. Is it possible to get a wider tonal range with this developer? Should I use something else? How would it compare against Rodinal?

 

[George Bonanno]

Smarten up... shoot at ISO 25 and process in HC110B (1:31) for 6.5 minutes at 68º f with 30 second agitation intervals.
Rodinal is a bad choice even though it’s printed on the inner sleeve.
If you insist on using D76 then process straight undiluted for 6 minutes at 68º f.
Keep in mind Pan F Plus is actually a crappy film.

 

[George Bonanno]

BTW: Pan F Plus requires very accurate exposure. The characteristic curve is horrid (straight line) and extremely hard to control (unforgiving) by todays standards.
Seasoned film photographers give me bricks of this film because they cannot make use of it.
Since I expose it under controlled flat lighting (flashbulbs) it’s a piece of (cheese) cake.
On a friendly note: I suggest you toss Pan F Plus and choose something else especially if it’s 35mm as opposed to 120 format.

So... that’s that on that.

 

[kossi008]

Crappy, eh? Do you like ****storms? 😉

I'll just answer with Arthur Dent's reply to the recitation of Vogon poetry: "Actually, I rather liked it."

PS: If you need space, I can give you a forwardng address for all those bricks of Pan F... 😀

 

[George Bonanno]

Let’s be candid here... Pan F Plus isn’t worth the cardboard box it’s packaged in.

 

[Sid836]

Thought so! I have tried everything. Increasing exposure and reducing development in D-76 and in Rodinal makes it muddy grey. The shadow areas are almost always black.
Would D-23 help any on this? It is supposed to be less harsh than D-76.

 

[George Bonanno]

Sorry to report there is no magic bullet concerning Pan F Plus. It’s closer to a high contrast low speed copy film and has no merit whatsoever for everyday photographic purposes. Please do yourself a favor and choose a good Kodak medium (100) or high (400) speed film. Your choice of developer, D76, etc., will be adequate for most if not all of your pictures. These oddball films are nothing but trouble and a crap shoot to say the least. You need to ask yourself... do I want to take good exposed pictures with constant results or be surprised with a flash in the pan crappy picture ? The ball is in your park.

 

[georg16nik]

I print with condenser enlarger and what Ilford gives for Pan F+ in Rodinal is spot on.

 

[George Bonanno]

Really ? I’m impressed with your said results. I print with an Omega cold light source enlarger and the prints are horridly snappy with normal process. I guess you hit the magic bullet.

Please... tell us your workflow.

 

[GarageBoy]

Active thread right here about similar problem http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/135614-more-thin-pan-f.html

 

[georg16nik]

Really ? I’m impressed with your said results. I print with an Omega cold light source enlarger and the prints are horridly snappy with normal process. I guess you hit the magic bullet.

Please... tell us your workflow.

I shoot Pan F+ @ ISO50 (box speed), Rodinal 1+50, distilled water, @18°C to 20°C for 11 to 16 minutes depending on light and scene. 2 slow inversions every 2 minutes. Then comes stop bath, fix, wash, dry. Sometimes I develop film and paper using my own photo chem. and also bleach the latent image before dev. when needed.
FB fixed grade paper, Emaks, Foma or Ilford.

 

[Murray Kelly]

I shoot Pan F+ @ ISO50 (box speed), Rodinal 1+50, distilled water, @18°C to 20°C for 11 to 16 minutes depending on light and scene. 2 slow inversions every 2 minutes. Then comes stop bath, fix, wash, dry. Sometimes I develop film and paper using my own photo chem. and also bleach the latent image before dev. when needed.
FB fixed grade paper, Emaks, Foma or Ilford.

Very interseting, Georg. IIRC you were talking SLIMT recently hereabouts. What final strength ferricyanide do you use on PanF+ and for how long?I figured 1g/l is 1mg/ml and it may be the '10' that Katchell talks about. Would that be strong enough or too muc?. The other George makes a good point and the pre-bleach as for microfilm may an easy answer. I am assuming you 'are' using ferricyanide.
TIA

 

[Nokton48]

I like PanF+ in PMK Pyro. Buy it from Photographers Formulary but have also mixed it from bulk chemicals. Great negs but they do not scan well due to the Pyro staining-effect. But they wet-print like silk.

One thing I do not like, is that the latent image tends to disappear rather quickly.
So develop within two weeks of initial exposure or get progressively crappy results.

 

[Moto-Uno]

I guess suggesting that my all time most favouritist ( of course that's a word !) picture
was with Pan F + in HC 110 B (120 format) . It's also quite possible that was BS luck!!
Peter

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I've never had trouble getting good results with Pan-F+. Both Rodinal and PMK give great results with it. D-76 is not the best developer choice for Pan-F+ in my experience.

Developed in Rodinal.

Developed in PMK

Developed in PMK

 

[julio1fer]

I like Pan F+ in Beutler mix, but I have also used it in D-76 and ID-11 1:1. Here, a Beutler example.

BTW, another address here if you want to get rid of those crappy Pan F+ bricks ;-)

 

[Sid836]

Pan F+ rated a bit lower than 50 and Rodinal 1:100 semi-stand for an hour is an amazing combo, give it a try! Talk is cheap, here's an example:



This was a 6x7 negative from my 2x3 Graphic and I think my 47mm XL or maybe it was my 58mm XL.

Pan F+ is certainly high-contrast but I wouldn't call it a crappy film, nor would I call it a copy film. It is extremely fine grained. Also, in my opinion D76 is a mediocre developer. Sure, you can develop anything in it, but all to a mediocre result. Just don't like it.

It looks nice in here. I had stopped doing stand development as I had no control over the contrast. This one looks like it eases quite a lot the harsh contrast of Pan F. I will do a test with a 12 frame roll.

 

[Corran]

I haven't found it to be an issue. Just another tool in the toolbox. Contrast control, in my opinion, is for sheet film. Semi-stand is just very forgiving in my experience. I haven't been using it as much though, as I've been having some strange results with Rodinal (Adonal) depending on the age and oxidation of the solution. I'm "aging" my new bottle of Adonal right now...

 

[Murray Kelly]

I like Pan F+ in Beutler mix, but I have also used it in D-76 and ID-11 1:1. Here, a Beutler example.

BTW, another address here if you want to get rid of those crappy Pan F+ bricks ;-)

Julio, just because we are in the southern hemisphere, you don't have to print the pictures upside down,🙂
Nice control of the film tho!
I have to say that none of the micro films I have wrestled with have been as amenable as Pan F+. To me they are like a mongrel dog and need very attentive treatment.

 

[Mablo]

Once I used a 20 brick of PanF+ only to find out if it's usable with Rodinal. I don't use stand developing (ugly halos, uneven sky etc.) so I decided to concentrate on 1+50. Yes, it's usable but not my first film choice. The main problem for me is PanF+ has frustratingly unpredictable level of contrast. The moment you thought you had your EI's and dev. times etc. nailed down your recipe fails you spectacularly the next time around. In the rare occasion when you get it right it's perhaps the most beautiful b&w film in the world.