Anyone shoot Royal-X Pan back in the day?

[DDTJRAC]

L.A. c.1972/73

Photo: D.D.Teoli Jr.​

I had just discovered Kodak Royal-X Pan and was just getting going experimenting with it. It had an ASA of 1250. It was pretty grainy stuff. I used it for a short time, then moved on to pushing Tri-X.

Did you ever shoot any Royal-X Pan?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

No. It was long gone by the time I got into photography. I wanted to try it after reading Howard Bond's experience with it...

 

[BrianShaw]

Tried it. Hated the grain.

 

[koraks]

I wasn't born yet, haha!
I like that photo though; nice.

 

[loccdor]

I've heard of it and seen the boxes around, but I never tried it because I knew it would be expired to oblivion.

 

[Paul Howell]

When in the Air Force we kept Royal Pan in stock in case we needed it. I recall having it in MF and 4X5 but never shot with it.

 

[Terrence Brennan]

I used it, in the 4x5 format, for an architectural assignment in my second year of university, in 1976.

I was photographing in a very dimly lit church. AFAIR, I exposed it at ISO (then ASA) 640, “pulling it” one f/stop, so as to try and not completely blow out the windows! I was able to make masks, via contact printing, to try and bring a bit more detail into the negatives with windows in the frame.

FWIW, I made the exterior views of the church on Plus-X 4x5 film.

 

[Mr Bill]

I used it in the later 1960s for high school (grade 9-12) for high school basketball. It sorta allowed the use of a 120 roll-film camera (a tlr with f-2.8 lens for example) to compete with 35mm cameras equipped with f/2 lenses. For newspaper use. Different times.

 

[Alan Townsend]

L.A. c.1972/73

Photo: D.D.Teoli Jr.​

I had just discovered Kodak Royal-X Pan and was just getting going experimenting with it. It had an ASA of 1250. It was pretty grainy stuff. I used it for a short time, then moved on to pushing Tri-X.

Did you ever shoot any Royal-X Pan?

Yes, around 1968-69 in a 4x5 Crown Graphic both belonging to my high school. I recall shooting it at 1000 ei, used mostly with the big flash bulbs indoors. I used it since that's what they had available for free for school use. School darkroom had D3 Omega and film hangars and tanks. Also, they only had D76 available, so used gallon kits for the chemistry in gallon tanks with 4x5 hangars. As I recall, 8x10 prints for these 4x5 negatives weren't very grainy looking.

 

[xkaes]

Royal-X Pan is often confused with Royal Pan, for obvious reasons, but they are very different. Kodak lists the grain as MODERATE, but it's really HIGH, like 2475 Recording film. Still, when used in a 4x5" camera it's great for plenty of subjects -- as in the above shot. I've got several boxes in the freezer. I usually shoot it at ISO 800, but if the subject is right, it can be used in normal light too.

GRAIN is NOT a four-letter word!!!

 

[Vaughn]

I have never used Royal-X, just the slower Royal Pan in 4x5 back in the early 80s.

 

[xkaes]

I haven't tried it yet with a pinhole, but they should be a perfect match -- for the film AND the subject.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Wow there's heaps of it on ebay. I'm looking at this one. Should I get it? I'm a little worried about the potential of high base fog though...

 

[wiltw]

1966-1968, I actually exposed many dozens of frames of 4x5 Royal-X Pan in a Crown Graphic, to shoot high school football games played at night.
On the high school newspaper staff, we used it in order to be able to better expose shots in the stadium when even stadium lighting was not as bright you can readily find today. While grainy, it was better than shooting ASA400 Tri-X on 135 format, since you started with only one-quarter of the enlargement factor of the neg, and printed using newsprint coarse screens no one ever complained about the grain Starting with a 4x5 neg, it permitted cropping of the frame for the final shot sent to publication.
It contributed greatly to my photography learning

• Use and care of the 4x5 field camera
• Loading and unloading 4x5 film magazines
• Tray developing 4x5 film in the dark
• First experiences with pro grade electronic flash, in the days when most photographers used flash bulbs

 

[wiltw]

Wow there's heaps of it on ebay. I'm looking at this one. Should I get it? I'm a little worried about the potential of high base fog though...

View attachment 417957

that fourth shot...to show you examples of the film, as proof of something?!

 

[wiltw]

I used it in the later 1960s for high school (grade 9-12) for high school basketball. It sorta allowed the use of a 120 roll-film camera (a tlr with f-2.8 lens for example) to compete with 35mm cameras equipped with f/2 lenses. For newspaper use. Different times.

Yes, around 1968-69 in a 4x5 Crown Graphic both belonging to my high school. I recall shooting it at 1000 ei, used mostly with the big flash bulbs indoors.

Us birds of similar feather! I used one of these instead of flashbulbs, although ours had a switch on top to select fractional power output...510V battery powered.

We had an Omega D2 in the darkroom.--Wilt

 

[Mr Bill]

Us birds of similar feather! I used one of these instead of flashbulbs, although ours had a switch on top to select fractional power output...510V battery powered.

Yep, good old Stroboflash! I sometimes used one for bounce flash off the gym ceiling. It added about a half stop of light to the TLR camera with Royal-X Pan. Which, when you're right on the edge of having enough light, makes a difference.

 

[DDTJRAC]

I've heard of it and seen the boxes around, but I never tried it because I knew it would be expired to oblivion.

In the 70's I would wander down Freestyle's aisles of expired military film at their old location. I bought some 4x5 glass plates expired around 1954. They still worked fine. You never know about this stuff. But maybe hi ASA might develop a fog. I was broke so liked expired cheap film back then. I don't fool with expired stuff now except for eBay ink for my Epson R2000. Some of it is expired 6 or 7 years and still work. I'd buy fresh, but Epson discontinued ink for it. A big part of Freestyles biz was repackaging expired 35mm movie film or remnant lots of cine' film to sell to still shooters. No matter what you bought from them, even photo paper, it was repackaged. Fresh meant it had just expired. (My guess.)

 

[DDTJRAC]

Yes, around 1968-69 in a 4x5 Crown Graphic both belonging to my high school. I recall shooting it at 1000 ei, used mostly with the big flash bulbs indoors. I used it since that's what they had available for free for school use. School darkroom had D3 Omega and film hangars and tanks. Also, they only had D76 available, so used gallon kits for the chemistry in gallon tanks with 4x5 hangars. As I recall, 8x10 prints for these 4x5 negatives weren't very grainy looking.

Yes, I guess it was doable with larger formats. I only used it in 35mm.

 

[DDTJRAC]

Wow there's heaps of it on ebay. I'm looking at this one. Should I get it? I'm a little worried about the potential of high base fog though...

View attachment 417957

That is funny!

Since they don't have a thumbs up or thanks option here...