I thought I'd make a new thread instead of continuing the conversations I had joined ( here and here )
I finally got round to developing and scanning my first roll of Pancro 400 in 35mm.
I found some fresh rolls for sale online. I was intrigued by the Naked Photographer's review here, showing a beautiful straight line in D76 1:1, and an interesting, pretty standard panchromatic, albeit slightly red-extended response.
The Naked Photographer's impressions were then corroborated by the only other quantitative test I could find online, which is the one by Photrio's member @Adrian Bacon here https://www.photrio.com/forum/resou...lenished-xtol-for-12-30-at-24c-in-a-jobo.428/ (Adrian, if you're still around here, thank you for your tests!).
I'm not normally hopping around film brands, but I'm in a significant transition phase - I'm in the process of abandoning Foma 100/200/400, which I had been using almost exclusively for years, and settling on something else. My journey with Kentmere has so far been oddly disappointing. Great stuff, manufactured to the highest pro level, but I just can't can't gel with with the results I'm getting so far.
So before I call it a day and just move to TriX as my all purpose, non-specialty film, I wanted to see if I can support other smaller players. Enter Bergger Pancro.
I bought 10 rolls of Bergger S/N 1807011601 exp 12/26 and three bags of Adox Atomal. I initially thought I'd use BER49, but this is twice as expensive as Atomal and a German forum (APHOG) reports BER49 is Atomal, so I went with that.
For my first roll I followed the manufacturer's recommendations pretty closely, with a slight correction motivated by the results of Adrian Bacon and the Naked Photographer, who used XTOL and D76 respectively. The first reports an EI of 320 in Xtol, the second exposed as usual, box speed but I can see slightly less shadow detail than the TriX reference in his video. I went for an EI of 250EI to be really on the safe side (turns out I didn't need to).
Methods
So, following the tech sheet here https://bergger.com/fr/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=4 I went with
The base+veil is, as often reported, unusual, both in density and colour. Here's how it looks compared to two other films I use a lot, and to Aviphot 200 which is almost transparent (cellulose triacetate, I believe).
I've scanned the entire roll using a $200 Minolta dedicated film scanner. The scanner had zero issues whatsoever with the base+veil, and I'd imagine even cheap flatbeds would do well with a modicum (2x-3X) of multisampling if necessary.
Here are some results. Note that no local post-processing was applied on these images post inversion apart from setting the black point. No digital vignetting, no sepia toning, no dodging, no burning. Anyone with any consumer scanner/DSLR setup, given the negatives, will reproduce these in 1 minute.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
In another thread I'd read complaints about the poor sharpness of this film in 35mm. I didn't notice anything wrong with the sharpness. Here's two sections from samples #2 and #5 above, at the scanner's native 3200dpi resolution
My Notes & Random Observations
My next steps will be to see how this responds to more standard development regimes, in my case Adox XT-3 or D76 stock. I will also definitely be less cautious and expose it at 320 EI in Xtol - I suspect it will work even better than EI 250 in my workflow.
I only wish I could find it in 120, because I suspect I will like it even more.
I finally got round to developing and scanning my first roll of Pancro 400 in 35mm.
I found some fresh rolls for sale online. I was intrigued by the Naked Photographer's review here, showing a beautiful straight line in D76 1:1, and an interesting, pretty standard panchromatic, albeit slightly red-extended response.
The Naked Photographer's impressions were then corroborated by the only other quantitative test I could find online, which is the one by Photrio's member @Adrian Bacon here https://www.photrio.com/forum/resou...lenished-xtol-for-12-30-at-24c-in-a-jobo.428/ (Adrian, if you're still around here, thank you for your tests!).
I'm not normally hopping around film brands, but I'm in a significant transition phase - I'm in the process of abandoning Foma 100/200/400, which I had been using almost exclusively for years, and settling on something else. My journey with Kentmere has so far been oddly disappointing. Great stuff, manufactured to the highest pro level, but I just can't can't gel with with the results I'm getting so far.
So before I call it a day and just move to TriX as my all purpose, non-specialty film, I wanted to see if I can support other smaller players. Enter Bergger Pancro.
I bought 10 rolls of Bergger S/N 1807011601 exp 12/26 and three bags of Adox Atomal. I initially thought I'd use BER49, but this is twice as expensive as Atomal and a German forum (APHOG) reports BER49 is Atomal, so I went with that.
For my first roll I followed the manufacturer's recommendations pretty closely, with a slight correction motivated by the results of Adrian Bacon and the Naked Photographer, who used XTOL and D76 respectively. The first reports an EI of 320 in Xtol, the second exposed as usual, box speed but I can see slightly less shadow detail than the TriX reference in his video. I went for an EI of 250EI to be really on the safe side (turns out I didn't need to).
Methods
So, following the tech sheet here https://bergger.com/fr/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=4 I went with
- 2 minutes prewash tap water 24°C
- Adox Atomal stock 24°C 9'30'', inversion regime as per tech sheet
- 40 seconds Fomacitro stop
- 6 minutes Fomafix
- Wash 5' via a Paterson hose between faucet and tank
- Fotoflo and hang to dry (sadly I erroneously used too much Photoflow, which shows in some of the images)
The base+veil is, as often reported, unusual, both in density and colour. Here's how it looks compared to two other films I use a lot, and to Aviphot 200 which is almost transparent (cellulose triacetate, I believe).
I've scanned the entire roll using a $200 Minolta dedicated film scanner. The scanner had zero issues whatsoever with the base+veil, and I'd imagine even cheap flatbeds would do well with a modicum (2x-3X) of multisampling if necessary.
Here are some results. Note that no local post-processing was applied on these images post inversion apart from setting the black point. No digital vignetting, no sepia toning, no dodging, no burning. Anyone with any consumer scanner/DSLR setup, given the negatives, will reproduce these in 1 minute.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
In another thread I'd read complaints about the poor sharpness of this film in 35mm. I didn't notice anything wrong with the sharpness. Here's two sections from samples #2 and #5 above, at the scanner's native 3200dpi resolution
My Notes & Random Observations
- High base+veil, which doesn't affect the results
- Film dries very flat - as flat as Kentmere 100/400 or Ilford
- Nice dense negatives - I could have very easily gone up to 320EI in my workflow. I've read anecdotal findings that this "is a 160EI film". Not at all, for me.
- Excellent QC: no pinholes, no scratches, no issues whatsoever. Beautifully clean negatives. Ilford-level of QC
- Grain - I was prepared to expect gargantuan grain - the grain is present, but I like it a lot. Not much bigger than Kentmere 400 in D76, and much nicer for my taste
- Sharpness - I am not seeing any issues with sharpness. The reports on poor sharpness are probably due to most people using flatbeds to scan 35mm
- Exquisite tonal range. This is what surprised me. I loved the tonal response, straight out the scanner. Most of the Flickr images I had seen were a good indication of this, but it was nice to see it first hand.
- Fantastic highlight and halation control - this is way better than the Kentmere range in 35mm.
- Easy to develop - Nothing really exotic, or difficult in terms of processing. It's actually easier for me to work at 24 degrees, and the slightly longer fixing time doesn't bother me at all. An easy film to develop, honestly.
My next steps will be to see how this responds to more standard development regimes, in my case Adox XT-3 or D76 stock. I will also definitely be less cautious and expose it at 320 EI in Xtol - I suspect it will work even better than EI 250 in my workflow.
I only wish I could find it in 120, because I suspect I will like it even more.
Last edited:
Could be old stock of N74 or a precursor of N74.
