Poly Pan F iso 50 film

7824376352_ab55446e92_c.jpg


Polypan 50 @ 50. Leica M6 TTL with Elmar 50mm f2.8 vI in Td 201 A/B developer.
 
Polypan F, 100 ISO, 15ml Ilford DDX + 650ml water, 30 mins stand development at 30 deg C. 1800DPI scan. The negs are a little thin for darkroom printing but scan well.

ppf_ddx on Flickr

The next two photos show the drastic light fall off for anything in shade

ppf_ddx2 on Flickr


ppf_ddx3 on Flickr

while the bright stuff holds together pretty good.

ppf_ddx4 on Flickr

Maybe it's the way I photoshop the pics. Here's a raw scan for anyone who wants to try.

polypanf_rawscan on Flickr
 
i sort of settled Polypan F at iso 100
with D-76 at 1+1 dilution and
10mins - 10.30min of development time
at 30C (<-- !!!).

I like it so far, grainy with a sparkle.

Here are 2 images from today,
the famous Hillstreet Char Kway Teow Store

Hill Street Char Kway Teow @ Bedok South Hawker Ctr
Leica M3 + Summarit 50/f1.5
Film is Ilford Polypan F rated at iso 100
Developed in D-76

hillstreet-a.jpg


hillstreet-b.jpg


raytoei
 
I hope I won't spoil your mood but Polypan is crappy TSF.
It curls like hell.
Grainy
No A.H. layer
Static

The cheapest film you can get.

If you go for cheap:
Double-X
UN54
N74+
Fomapan 100
Rest stock APX-100

At least you have some quality.
 
I have to disagree. The only issue I have seen so far is lack of AH layer. It dries flat - interestingly my TMAX/TriX curls a lot. It has pretty fine grain - finer than TriX for sure, and possibly finer than TMAX 400. And I don't see static from my experience. In terms of price, it's unbeatable. I bought 500 feet for less than the price of 100 feet of any "cheap" film you mentioned...


Fotohuis said:
I hope I won't spoil your mood but Polypan is crappy TSF.
It curls like hell.
Grainy
No A.H. layer
Static

The cheapest film you can get.

If you go for cheap:
Double-X
UN54
N74+
Fomapan 100
Rest stock APX-100

At least you have some quality.
Click to expand...
 
finer than TriX for sure
Click to expand...

This is of course a rediculous comparision. Tri-X you can use in an range of E.I. 200-1600 (3200). Polypan E.I. 50-200. Shooting Polypan at 200 and Tri-X 400 at 200 will show you that Tri-X 400 is a much better film on all points.

Which doesn't mean a TSF is always bad. R3 (Rollei) was also a TSF type film (TC27 Filmotec). But on Clear Polyester layer with a double non-curling and an effective A.H. layer. Build up in three layers, iso 50-150-400, hence R3. With any deep layer developer you could get good results with it in a range of iso 50-800. But this film was adapted for regular photography.

Let say it in my way: I would not spoil any of my photos on Polypan. A waste of my time and photos/negatives.
But of course you are free to have a different opinion. ;)
 
PPF 50 has the following issues:

- can get sticky in tropical climate
- a bit thin, difficult to load sometimes
- 3rd and 4th frame get light leaks

But at $30 for 500 feet. I think it is a good "fodder" film
that i use everyday. I have tried various developers:
HC110, Rodinal, Ethol UFG, D76, they do not curl when dried,
which makes scanning a joy.

i won't comment on the graininess as I am not qualified but
i will say that PPF makes skin tones sparkle.

carnations-ppf.jpg

contax aria + 85/f1.4


raytoei
 
I haven't tried Poly Pan F, but from the results I've seen on this thread, it definitely would be worth trying out.

I've shot a fair bit of Ilford Pan F+, but it's not one of my fave films. It dries too curly, no matter what developer I use -- I live in an extremely dry climate (RH of 30% or lower all year) and other films adapt much better to the dry air.

That being said, it has a beautiful 'look' to it ... sometimes Ilford PanF+ seems to really shine. It definitely has its own unique character.

This shot was done on a Leica M7, 'Cron 50/2 version 4, PanF+ shot at 50 ISO. Developed in D-76 stock for 7 min. at 20 C.

7405733232_f2b52c0274_z.jpg
 
The way how curly a film is depends on:

Type of material: Polyester or tri-Acetate, Polyester will always curl more.
How effective the n.c. layer has been made.
The thickness of the layer.
How quick the film is drying (humidity, temperature).
The type of wetting agent which is used.

TSF material: Always very thin, n.c. layer not present, always made on Polyester.
 
Fotohuis said:
I hope I won't spoil your mood but Polypan is crappy TSF.
Click to expand...
The usual compulsory routine: PolypanF is NOT a TSF. It's a cine duplication film.

Fotohuis said:
Let say it in my way: I would not spoil any of my photos on Polypan. A waste of my time and photos/negatives.
But of course you are free to have a different opinion. ;)
Click to expand...
I've shot ~200m PolypanF in 2012. If correct exposed and developed, I can't see a waste of effort. I see usable negatives.

I would say it's a waste of your time, to post questionable prejudices in this thread ... but that's of course your decision. ;)

Back to topic, photos:

in Adox MQ Borax:
image.jpg


image.jpg


in Beutler 1+1+10:
image.jpg


in Xtol 1+3:
image.jpg


image.jpg


image.jpg


All without PP beside correction of the scanner-AE and a bit spotting...
 
I've only had luck with this stuff with Rodenel 1+100 sit an hour when shot at 50asa
Good results.

8326717424_20170009a2_c.jpg

8326709966_2c304afd05_c.jpg
 
2 more pix before i go zzz (way past my bedtime).
both at iso 100 and developed in d-76

m5cron, and printed on ilford multigrade (and scanned) excuse the dust!

print-652-small.jpg


m5cron, scanned from negative, a bit of motion blur + reflection of glass

ppf-m5cron.jpg
 
haempe said:
The usual compulsory routine: PolypanF is NOT a TSF. It's a cine duplication film.


I've shot ~200m PolypanF in 2012. If correct exposed and developed, I can't see a waste of effort. I see usable negatives.

I would say it's a waste of your time, to post questionable prejudices in this thread ... but that's of course your decision. ;)
Click to expand...

Well said, haempe!
I exposed and developed 950 rolls of Polypan since 2009, mostly by guess and stand developed them with developer temperatures between 17 an 25 deg C and even my weirdest actions could´t kill this film. When my pictures are crappy, it´s not the fault of Polypan!

The pictures in this thread should be enough evidence for the quality of Polypan.

A technical note: I take the film out of the tank after rinsing and strip off the water with a paper towel (Aldi brand;-), then hang it to dry. This reduced the dust problems, but spotting in PS is still necessary.
 
i took the leap and used polypan f 50@100 for some portrait work,

the difference was the lighting with flash.

and skin tones.

the below pix was taken with the Hexar AF with PPF exposed at iso 100

way overdeveloped in Rodinal stand.

and scanned with the minolta 5400 scanner

ilovefilm.jpg
 
raytoei@gmail.com said:
having used about 10 rolls of PPF50. here are somemore observations:

a. love the tonality of the film. under certain circumstances, hair and skin seem to sparkle when contrast / brightness are adjusted.

b. Very thin and very flat, easy to scan. I had a bit of problems feeding it into some of my cameras but those were nothing more than just minor issues.

c. It is more grainy than Ilford Pan F but less so than 400 film. D76 developer is nice. Rodinal at room temperature produces large marble grains.


here is a picture that has been adjusted fro contrast, brightness etc:

tigerdragon.jpg

Was in suntec, saw this chap with a tiger and dragon.
couldn't resist, asked politely, wish was granted.
M6TTL with CV 35f1.4 Film is Polypan F iso 50.
Post processing to add contrast and bring out grains.

raytoei
Click to expand...

Loving that shot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom