Shot Rollei Pan 25 at ISO 400...

[J J Kapsberger]

...thinking that I had Tri-X in the Rolleiflex.

That's the problem with loading the Rolleiflex and leaving it sit for a few weeks. (And failing to dial in the ISO number on the focusing wheel -- it was still at ISO 400)

I have HC-110, Rodinal and FG7. Can anyone recommend a time?

 

[Al Kaplan]

Your safest bet would be to sacrifice a couple more rolls of Rollei Pan 25 and expose them at 400. As just a quick and dirty guess I'd try normal two bath processing in Diafine followed by about twice the suggested time in Rodinal 1:100 or HC-110 at the 1:64 dilutions with very little agitation. With your sacrificial rolls, after you shoot them you could cut them in thirds to develop seperately at various times. Get a pad of paper and when you shoot them (all of the same scene) have the pad in the photo so you can write test one, test two, etc. and keep track of what you're doing.

You should end up with something printable but not great by any means!

Pick up a roll of masking tape and a Sanford Sharpy. Put 2 or 3 inches of tape on your Rollie marked with the film type and speed. Take it off the camera and wrap it around your roll of exposed film after EVERY roll, or just stick to one kind of film in the future.

 

[Tom A]

Been there and done that! I think Al's suggestion is a good one - shoot another roll the same way and try it. If it doesn't work - "fry" it in Rodinal. I have done Neopan F (nominally 40 asa) and mistakenly shot it at 400! Those damned green Fuji cassette all look alike in low light! I did put it in Rodinal 1:10 for 60 minutes - agitated every 60 sec. too. How to turn a very fine grain film into Kodaks Royal X Pan! Grainy and strange contrast - but printable - kind off.

 

[Rob-F]

You might try Ilford Microphen. I have had good luck pushing film with this developer, though I have never tried four stops worth of pushing! I've not tried it with Rollei pan 25, either. I don't think you will have much shadow detail, no matter what you do.

One idea would be to go back and re-shoot those subjects--unless you would have to buy a plane ticket!

 

[J J Kapsberger]

Thanks for the feedback. Truth be told it's likely not a roll of masterpieces. I think I'll take a shot in the dark with a wild guess using HC-110. If I ruin it, it won't be the end of the world. If a miracle happens, I'll post an image.

 

[Tom A]

I would double or triple my normal times for this - or even mix HC 110 as per normal and do a stand development for 45-60 min. Dont over agitate as that will just boost the contrast to graphic levels - but let it stand for 30 min, a swift "kick" - a couple of inversions and then another 30 min.

 

[notturtle]

Yikes. I have just about pulled off decent images from delta 100 @400 (underexposed but just printable) by reducing agitation and adding 50% to the time with Xtol 1+2, but another two stops slower than that is likely to prove too much. Try the suggestions given and let us know how you got on! however, I will be surprised if you win on this one. Good luck - hope they were not important!

 

[Brian.Chu]

I know this thread is already 2 years old, but I also had a similar experience. I thought I'd just share my experience and the outcome here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/19thavenue/3689319366/in/set-72157624427298156

 

[40oz]

I exposed a roll of Pan F at 400 once and developed it as if it was Tri-X in D-76 and the results were actually fine. Not as good as properly exposed, but hardly ruined. Same issue as you - thought it was Tri-X until it was developed.