Lucky SHD 100 - Your Experience?

[Saganich]

Yea, can't judge on one data point. I have a roll in my Hawkeye and will put one through my Rolleiflex this weekend. None of these cameras has ever given me issues and when I scrutinize other films there is nothing to comment on. Perhaps the delicacy of the film is challenging to aged equipment, lol.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

An old bakelite 66 camera of mine, puts quite a bit of stress on films, leaving strange marks behind.

 

[quigs]

definitely some issues on all 6 frames with these odd lines on 4/6 frames. I don't think these lines are camera related, handling issues, sewing thread, or cat hair on the film. The frames have about 5-8 lines like this all parallel with same arch pattern at the beginning/end.

That matches my experience with the 35mm version of SHD400. Definitely try a different camera, but if the scratches/lines vary across rolls it could be the film being delicate during reel loading too. I had a few issues with scratches even with SHD100 in 120 when loading plastic reels because of how thin and curly the film base is. I stopped getting them when I switched to metal reels.

 

[chuckroast]

[May 2026] Still Standing

Hasselblad 501 CM, 80mm f/2.8 CFE Planar, Lucky SHD 100 @ EI 80, PMK Pyro, Scan of silver print

 

[chuckroast]

(@Andrew O'Neill as promised, SHD100 in PMK)

It would seem that SHD 100 really likes PMK Pyro, though this picture was probably developed a bit too long. I used 12 min at normal 1:2:100 dilution and 11 min would have been a bit better.

 

[chuckroast]

Note To Self: You will not get good negatives if you are not paying attention and reverse the position of roll film on the feed side of a Hasselblad magazine so it feeds with the paper side facing the lens.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR .......

(I have never ever ever done this before with any magazine whether RH8, M645, or Hassy. Apparently old dogs can learn brand new ways to do stupid things. That's what I get for being in a big hurry.)

 

[John Wiegerink]

Note To Self: You will not get good negatives if you are not paying attention and reverse the position of roll film on the feed side of a Hasselblad magazine so it feeds with the paper side facing the lens.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR .......

(I have never ever ever done this before with any magazine whether RH8, M645, or Hassy. Apparently old dogs can learn brand new ways to do stupid things. That's what I get for being in a big hurry.)

Note To Self: You will not get good negatives if you are not paying attention and reverse the position of roll film on the feed side of a Hasselblad magazine so it feeds with the paper side facing the lens.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR .......

(I have never ever ever done this before with any magazine whether RH8, M645, or Hassy. Apparently old dogs can learn brand new ways to do stupid things. That's what I get for being in a big hurry.)

I know it can be done with a Bronica magazine too. Please don't ask me how I know. Luckily, I caught it before any damage was done. Never done it on a 'blad insert, but there's always a first time for everything.

 

[mshchem]

Note To Self: You will not get good negatives if you are not paying attention and reverse the position of roll film on the feed side of a Hasselblad magazine so it feeds with the paper side facing the lens.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR .......

(I have never ever ever done this before with any magazine whether RH8, M645, or Hassy. Apparently old dogs can learn brand new ways to do stupid things. That's what I get for being in a big hurry.)

I've not done that but have done the failure to get it under the little clamp thing. Could wind on with difficulty. Did that 3 or 4 times, not recently, probably due. .

Only way not to screw up is to give in!

 

[chuckroast]

I can now report that when the film emulsion faces the lens, you get images. Who knew?

 

[mshchem]

I can now report that when the film emulsion faces the lens, you get images. Who knew?

I remember once I was out shooting a lovely Crown Graphic, trying to insert the darkslide after a shot, bit of a struggle, found the sheet of Ektachrome in the bellows of the camera

 

[chuckroast]

I remember once I was out shooting a lovely Crown Graphic, trying to insert the darkslide after a shot, bit of a struggle, found the sheet of Ektachrome in the bellows of the camera

We probably should start a "Stupid Photographer Tricks" thread

Anyway. I have found that SHD 100 responds well to D-23 1+9+0.5g/l lye in 25 min semistand. i have not yet printed any of the negatives , but they look good.

 

[chuckroast]

A few notes today from recent experience with SHD 100:

1. The film base appears to have a slightly golden brown color. At first I thought it was just the Pyro staining, but even in D-23 this slight tinge exists.
   
   
2. The film base is thin by comparison to, say, 100TMAX or FP4+. It tends to curl when dry. It's annoying trying to get it to sit still in the negative carrier, but it's not unworkable.
   
   
3. A more evident issue with the thin base is that it appears to push some film transports to their tolerance limits. I have one Hasselblad A12 back that feeds it fine, and another that produces uneven frame spacing.
   
   All these backs work just fine with 400TX. I have seen this before with a Fuji GW690 that fed 400TX without issues, but had really sloppy frame separation with Agfapan APX100, another film with a thin base. CameraWiz told me that transport spacing issues with thinner films is not unheard of when he checked my 690.
   
   The back with the unreliable spacing is at ICT for an overhaul. I have three A12s and they are all at least 25 years old, so I am hoping that a CLA will put the back into its proper tolerances to correctly handle all films. If it does, I'll have the other two CLAed as well.
   
   These spacing issues - so far, anyway - have shown no frame overlap, just narrower and wider separation between exposures, so the system is at least still workable.
   
   
4. As noted previously, I did have one roll of 120 that had been cut short at the factory and that chopped off the 12th frame shot on the 'Blad. The image was fine and I was able to print it without any issues, it just wasn't square

Comments and experience of others would be welcome here. @Andrew O'Neill I'd be particularly curious if you see any of the above, especially the spacing issues, on your 'Blad system.

 

[brbo]

I wouldn't put much faith in his observations on Lucky films. He's only handling this film with 10' poles. Or not even that...

 

[chuckroast]

I wouldn't put much faith in his observations on Lucky films. He's only handling this film with 10' poles. Or not even that...

I think over a year ago, I would have had much the same reaction. My original interaction with Lucky was years ago with a monochrome film that initially had great promise but had terrible dust and QA issues. When the "new" Lucky came out, I decided to try it and was very pleasantly surprised.

As I understand it, Andrew has also had an evolving view on this and has purchased some SHD 100 to try.

I shoot in primarly two modes: "Serious" and "Test"

When I shoot seriously, particularly if it involves travel, I take no chances. I shoot Kodak and Ilford emulsions, and more recently, a bit of Fomapan 200.

But sometimes, I want to fiddle with a development technique, a change of formula, or otherwise generally experiment with something new. I don't want to use top shelf, expensive product for this, at least not initially to get things dialed in. That's where something like SHD 100 can jump in and help.

Or so I thought. The more I've fiddled with this stuff, the more impressed I am with the outcomes. The only significant QA issue I've hit was the aforementioned short roll. So yeah, I may actually do more serious work with it, though likely only for things I could get back to easily if things went pear shaped...

Part of what motivates me here is that I want to have a good set of choices for my remaining life as a photographer. Who knows what Kodak and Ilford will be up to when labour costs and/or economic realities hit them. I've thus been stocking up on everything I can afford.

P.S. I have no opinion about their colour emulsions as I only shoot film in monochrome.

P.P.S. I have no interest in confrontational discussion about this stuff. In reading the cited thread I note an edginess to it that I've no interest in perpetuating. People should use what they like and avoid what they don't. We're supposed to be enjoying this stuff.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Looks like I might be playing with my Lucky 100 tomorrow or the next day according to the tracking results. I just got a new batch of Adox XT-3 for a practice run along with Pyrocat HDC

 

[Roseha]

I hope this isn't a dumb question but....I just got my order of Lucky 100 in 5x7 - but inside the outer box was a large white inner box which looks about 9x12 inches in size...there's almost no English on it so does anyone know if it's okay to open this white box in the light? Is there a 5x7 light proof box inside?

Thanks for any help.

(I have emailed Refix to ask them about this)

 

[chuckroast]

I hope this isn't a dumb question but....I just got my order of Lucky 100 in 5x7 - but inside the outer box was a large white inner box which looks about 9x12 inches in size...there's almost no English on it so does anyone know if it's okay to open this white box in the light? Is there a 5x7 light proof box inside?

Thanks for any help.

(I have emailed Refix to ask them about this)

I would open it in the dark and see if you can figure out what 's going on. It may just be a shipping container, but it could also be part of a stacked box system to keep the film in a completely dark chamber.

 

[Roseha]

Thanks, it feels that there is another box inside but I'll leave it as is for the moment.

 

[chuckroast]

Looks like I might be playing with my Lucky 100 tomorrow or the next day according to the tracking results. I just got a new batch of Adox XT-3 for a practice run along with Pyrocat HDC

Do share your results here.

 

[thinkbrown]

I hope this isn't a dumb question but....I just got my order of Lucky 100 in 5x7 - but inside the outer box was a large white inner box which looks about 9x12 inches in size...there's almost no English on it so does anyone know if it's okay to open this white box in the light? Is there a 5x7 light proof box inside?

So the 4x5 I received came in a box that looks like that but smaller and contained the film inside two layers of plastic bags. I opened mine in a changing bag so I can't say for certain the bags are black/lightproof.

 

[chuckroast]

OK, here is SHD 100 in D-23 1+9+lye semistand for 25 min. Shot with an 80mm f/2.8 CFE Planar handheld.

Because these are handheld, it's hard to tell if the usual sharpening seen with high dilution D-23 made a difference here. However the film generally responds well to it.

Scans of silver prints:

[May 2026] Lift Off

[May 2026] Semistand

 

[chuckroast]

More takeaways, not necessarily just SHD 100 related:

• I have been adding 0.5g/l lye to D-23 1+9, but I am finding that the developer is somewhat too active when handing big SBRs like in the above scenes. I need to try reducing EI about 1/3 stop and either increasing dilution or reducing the amount of lye in solution slightly.
  
  
• Having semistand and EMA in your bag of tricks is really useful for scenes with a short SBR, especially with limited tonal separation in the mid tones. BUT ...
  
  
• For almost all other 'normal' shooting environments, PMK and Pyrocat in normal dilutions and agitation continue to shine. PMK is best when you have an enormous SBR and want stronger compensation effects than Pyrocat gives you.
  
  
• To my eye. PMK gives me slightly sharper negatives than Pyrocat does in ordinary dilutions and agitations. Both Pyrocat and D-23 will noticeably improve acutance if highly diluted and used with a low agitation, extended development scheme. However, this is only really helpful if the camera is tripod mounted and any mirror is locked up. Camera and/or shutter shake can neuter any increase in sharpness the development discipline brings.
  
  
• SHD 100 physically and tonally reminds a lot of Agfpan APX 100 except that the Lucky film takes Pyro stain a lot more readily than the Agfa did. Also, SHD 100 curls a lot in 120, which APX 100 never did,

NOTE: None of this is double blind tested or measured with a 23 digit precision scanning electron microscope and statistically analyzed on a 1000 node computing cluster.

 

[Milpool]

Regarding the first takeaway the original Beutler is essentially what you’ve described so perhaps worth a try if you haven’t already done so. Based on a reputable study it was an excellent metol developer for edge effects, and with a carbonate alkali vs lye it would tend toward lower fog which is always a good thing for image structure.

 

[chuckroast]

Regarding the first takeaway the original Beutler is essentially what you’ve described so perhaps worth a try if you haven’t already done so. Based on a reputable study it was an excellent metol developer for edge effects, and with a carbonate alkali vs lye it would tend toward lower fog which is always a good thing for image structure.

I've done a bit with Beutler and, as you say, it's very similar. I need to revisit it at some point.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I wouldn't put much faith in his observations on Lucky films. He's only handling this film with 10' poles. Or not even that...

I think I felt the same way about CatLabs 80 before giving it a go. I quite like what I've been seeing with the SHD 100, that I've got an 8x10 box on the way... Always looking for large format alternatives, for my alternative printing!