Pictures on Bergger Pancro 400

[x-ray]

My lab uses Clayton F76, which is pretty much D76 in a different bottle, as far as I know. However, I tend to like denser photos, so the result after a bit of Lightroom has darker shadows and more contrast than what Erik is producing.

Kirk

I agree. I feel Eriks images are a little flat for my taste. I'm wondering if he's processing his images on a glossy screen like a Retina display. Gloss screens can't be calibrated like a matte screen. Gloss screens always exaggerate brightness or the appearance of and contrast.

I use a fully profiled matte screen that displays 117% of Adobe RGD gamut and they look very flat. I imagine it's what he's aiming for though. I grabbed several of his images and made adjustments and did a side by side and posted them but decided it wouldn't be cool to do without his permission and deleted my post.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I agree. I feel Eriks images are a little flat for my taste. I'm wondering if he's processing his images on a glossy screen like a Retina display.

I have a matte screen, a Samsung SyncMaster 943, calibrated. I think it is a question of taste. In my uploads there is always the deepest black (value 1) and pure white (value 255), namely the black and white borders around the pictures. However, Bergger Pancro 400 produces quite dull images compared to Tmax400-2 (that I normally use). This is because the gradation curve is VERY steep. There aren't much tones in it compared to the Tmax400 with its wonderful broad curve. There is of course also a lot of Flickr in them.

If you see my pictures on a tablet, they look completely different.

Just to compare:

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, 400-2TMY.

Erik.

 

[x-ray]

I have a matte screen, a Samsung SyncMaster 943,calibrated. I think it is a question of taste. In my uploads there is always the deepest black (value 1) and pure white (value 255), namely the black and white borders around the pictures. However, Bergger Pancro 400 produces quite dull images compared to Tmax400-2 that I normally use. This is because the gradation curve is VERY steep. There aren't much tones in it compared to the Tmax400 with its wonderful broad curve. There is of course also a lot of Flickr in them.

If you see my pictures on a tablet, they look completely different.

Just to compare:

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, 400-2TMY

Id have to go back and look but think I mentioned the lack of separation in mid tones and higher contrast in highlights. Also I've found I need more shadow exposure. All of this goes along with your observation. I'm wet printing on Bergger paper though which is different than scanning.

This film actually reminds me of the early TMax films. I used to do pre release testing of new films in the field for both Kodak and Ilford. The pre release TMax films lacked midtown separation and shadow detail. When you exposed shadows correctly and processed for good separation in mid tones the highlights went out of control. Bergger 400 reminds me of this.

This might actually be a better scanning film than wet printing since mid tone contrast can be adjusted independently. I had high hopes for this film as well as the Foma retro pan 320 but neither have lived up to my expectations. I still have a few rolls of both and will test them in other developers as time permits. Now I'm looking forward to trying Ferrania P30 when it comes out. Hopefully it will live up to expectations. Meanwhile I'll continue to use out of my stock of Neopan 400 and when it's gone I'll be shooting HP5.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I never had any problems with the early Tmax 100 and 400. I used the 100 for half frame (Olympus Pen FT) and I enjoyed it very much. This was of course in the pre-scanning years.
I liked the 400 too, but I still miss the TriX from the 70's and 80's, wich in Europe was different than in the US.

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, Bergger Pancro 400.

Erik.

 

[x-ray]

I never had any problems with the early Tmax 100 and 400. I used the 100 for half frame (Olympus Pen FT) and I enjoyed it very much. This was of course in the pre-scanning years.
I liked the 400 too, but I still miss the TriX from the 70's and 80's, wich in Europe was different than in the US.

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, Bergger Pancro 400.

Erik

I

I was referring to the pre release versions of TMax 100 and 400 and the very early batches released to the consumer. Kodak sent each of us testing the products a hundred rolls or so at a time to shoot along side our normal film to do comparisons. At the time I was using Agfa 100 to the tune of several hundred rolls a month. The TMax I was using was 120 and was coated on a short run machine Kodak had specifically for test emulsions. The paper backing had no name on it and the wrapper was generic too. I guess in total I must have shot 500-600 rolls and written a lot of report. Every week or so our Kodak commercial rep would pick up the reports and negs to send to Rochester.

Actually the first few batches were on a really thick base. It was so thick it hardly would go through my Rollei SL66 backs. Hasselblad owners had problems too. In the end we all had to get our backs rebuilt due to the excessive wear caused by the super thick base. It was even reported to cause issues with Nikons motor drives. Based on our reports though Kodak thinned the base by 50% which was still too thick. It was certainly interesting to work on this project and be a part in the evolution of what's now a great product.

I had the fun of doing this for a new Kodachrome 200. I shot a lot of it side by side with my usual 120 chrome. I did a great deal of retail fashion work for two department store chains at that time. Most chrome I was using was Fuji Provia with people but occasionally Ektachrome if I wanted warmer skin, E100SW. Of course the Kodachrome had to go to Rochester for processing so I never saw the results and don't know if that specific product ever made it to market.

I also did the same with Ilford Delta 100 and 400.

I agree about TX. I really miss it especially today. I shot TX going back to the early 60's. Wonderful film. The new film unfortunately is nothing like the TX of the 60's through the 80's.

 

[Erik van Straten]

That's a very interesting story, x-ray. Thank you. Makes a nice read. I never tried the Ilford Delta films, but all the others I have used too.

My favorite is still the old TriX. Just to compare with the 400-2TMY and the Bergger this shot from 1974:

Nikkormat FTn, Nikkor-H-Auto 50mm f/2, TriX (D76).

Erik.

 

[roscoetuff]

Erik: FWIW, I like the grays in your shots. Yes, some are a tad dark and sometimes I wonder whether the sun shines in your world like it does in mine, but the grays are nevertheless quite rich and beautiful. I've seen UK folks post they don't get enough sunshine to get a lot of use out of ND filters... so I don't 2nd guess. I've pushed blacks up from 0 to 10 sometimes, but do that less and less... and I think I'd agree with you that this is actually in part a change in taste, but it also a matter of objective and presentation. If the original image is good and sharp and the composition strong, I'm less inclined to try to accentuate the content. Maybe that's a landscapist's approach vs. a "street" approach as it may be styles go with content...

But here's a wonder for you: Do you ever shoot for Perceptol at box speed? And what ISO are you using for Bergger Pancro 400? Thanks!

 

[Erik van Straten]

Do you ever shoot for Perceptol at box speed? And what ISO are you using for Bergger Pancro 400? Thanks!

When I use my M5, MP or Nikkormat I set the lightmeter at 200 ISO (ASA). A little overexposure when using a fine grain developer is necessary for shadow detail.
So far I only used two rolls of Bergger Pancro 400. That was in my M3. With meterless cameras I go meterless! So, also the 400-2TMY (Tmax400-2) I rate @ 200 ISO, but I do not use a meter.

However, I put the Bergger Pancro 400 in Perceptol 1+2 @ 23 degrees C for 11 minutes. I ignore the advice to pre-soak it etc. I don't think I will go on with it. I very much prefer the 400-2TMY.

Erik.

 

[x-ray]

Never used perceptol. My 2 main developers for the past fifty years has been HC110 or Rodinal with a few deviations like PMK Pyro and Acufine. The PMK has been more a curiosity and Acufine when I need a true speed boost.

I do miss the original TX that I used for many years. It was my standard 400 film until I did the testing for Delta 400. I've since drifted from Delta 400 to HP5 due to it being about as close to old TX as I can find. It's not TX by any stretch of the imagination but is a good dependable and more traditional 400 emulsion. It also works very well in HC110 B.

I'll add that 400 Delta is also a superb film. It's very fine grain and has a beautiful tonal scale with excellent separation in tones from the shadows to the highlights. It doesn't mush out in mid tones like I'm finding with the Bergger 400. It also hadles extremes of contrast extremely well when pulling processing is needed. I've shot available light under conditions well beyond the contrast capabilities of many films. I've had excellent results exposing Delta 400 at EI 100 and pulling the development 20-25% with HC110 B. I however haven't pushed the film.

I'll be honest, I've certainly not shot enough Bergger 400 to see what it can really do. I feel I need to shoot 10-20 rolls and really tweak the developer and process to determine what It'l do. Though from the limited amount I've shot I'm see ing I need to rate it at 320 or 250 to get adequate shadows. Also I need to find a developer that will build contrast in the mid tones and hold tonality in the highlights. Not sure that exists. I just have to determine how much time I want to put into it and if there's going to be a gain over HP5 and Delta 400. Also I do love the newest generation of Tmax 100 and 400 but they're certainly not old world looking. The new Tmax emulsions are 180 degrees from the original Tmax. The new emulsions have amazing tonal separation throughout the range and have sharpness that's amazing with virtually no grain.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I would like to try the Delta 400, but ISO 100 is too slow for me. The 400-2TMY is absolutely modern looking, but the tonality is superb and with this film you can get everything out of your old and modern lenses. I like the idea to stay with one film so finally I will know what I can do with it. It is a personal matter.

Erik.

 

[x-ray]

Really 100 speed is where I'm needing a good film right now. I never liked PX and do like Delta 100 and Tmax 100 but they're a little modern looking for some of my work. Delta not so much as Tmax but I'm looking for a more vintage emulsion. Iso 400 is covered with HP5 but I'm not a big fan of FP4. I have trouble taming the contrast. I'm sure it's me but I have a problem with it. I'm looking forward to seeing the P30 Ferrania and have high hopes for it. Fuji Acros is still around and I do like it a lot so that's a possibility.

For so many years I used two emulsions and then TX was discontinued and everything went to pieces. If the old Agfa 100 APX was still around I'd give it a shot again. I probably shot close to 7 or 8 thousand rolls of it in 120. I can't even guess how much TX I shot.

Everything went to pieces when digital came in. It's essential in my business but if I could I'd go back to film today.

 

[roscoetuff]

x-ray: FWIW... and off topic here, I've found FP4+ in Pyrocat-HD to give a nice rendition shot with an orange filter (2/3 stop) to give the skies the way I like. The only thing I'm less thrilled about with pyrocat-HD is the handling. While I'm new to FP4+, I think I like it's tonality much better than HP5+ and the contrast seemed just fine... actually quite tame. Then again, my technique favors high dilution, minimal agitation for a long tank development (20 to 24 minutes), and I'm not far enough along in this game to tell you which caused which, only that I like what I see. Contrast after my minimal adjustment in a Capture One negative scan (using a Sony mirrorless DSLR) is just slightly north of what Erik has here in my favorite shots, but not much.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, Bergger Pancro 400.

Erik.

 

[Uncle Bill]

My experiences on Berrger Pancro 400, processed in HC110 B.
Camera: Minolta XE-7, MC Rokkor lenses.

I found the film slightly grainier than Rollei RPX 400, but I really love the tonality Pancro 400 brings. Now bear in mind the photos I shot below were on a rather flat hazy day.

Shrouded Elora Mill_ by Bill Smith, on Flickr

cast Iron Bridge Across the Grand River by Bill Smith, on Flickr

Reflected Elora Buildings by Bill Smith, on Flickr

 

[Uncle Bill]

Pancro 400 falls between Tri-X 400 and JCH 400 in terms of price in Canada. I have to try the film in medium format in my Rolleis and Mamiya C220f.

 

[Deklari]

Leica IIIc , Summitar f2, 50mm, Bergger Pancro 400, D76 1:1

 

[HHPhoto]

If the old Agfa 100 APX was still around I'd give it a shot again. I probably shot close to 7 or 8 thousand rolls of it in 120. I can't even guess how much TX I shot.

The original German Agfa APX 100 emulsion is still around, but just in an improved way with a bit higher silver content and on a clear base:
It is Adox Silvermax.

Try it, you will like it. You get the real original APX 100 look.

Cheers, Jan

 

[x-ray]

x-ray: FWIW... and off topic here, I've found FP4+ in Pyrocat-HD to give a nice rendition shot with an orange filter (2/3 stop) to give the skies the way I like. The only thing I'm less thrilled about with pyrocat-HD is the handling. While I'm new to FP4+, I think I like it's tonality much better than HP5+ and the contrast seemed just fine... actually quite tame. Then again, my technique favors high dilution, minimal agitation for a long tank development (20 to 24 minutes), and I'm not far enough along in this game to tell you which caused which, only that I like what I see. Contrast after my minimal adjustment in a Capture One negative scan (using a Sony mirrorless DSLR) is just slightly north of what Erik has here in my favorite shots, but not much.

Ive never used pyrocat HD but did get very nice negs in Pmk pyro. My wish is to find a film that works well in HC110 B. Wishing and reality might be two different things though. Thanks for the info.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Leica IIIc , Summitar f2, 50mm, Bergger Pancro 400, D76 1:1

Thank you for this!

 

[x-ray]

The original German Agfa APX 100 emulsion is still around, but just in an improved way with a bit higher silver content and on a clear base:
It is Adox Silvermax.

Try it, you will like it. You get the real original APX 100 look.

Cheers, Jan

I didn't realize it was basically the same as the old emulsion. I'm going to have to get some.

I was digging through my film freezer and found a box of 4x5 100 that I didn't know I had. I'm going to have to shoot it on something special.

Thanks!