• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Bergger Pancro 400 - 135 roll

Gimenosaiz

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
189
Location
Spain - old
Format
Multi Format
Hi!
I've developed a 135mm roll with Berspeed.
Following Begger instructions, I presoaked the film for one minute.
Canon EOS 1v
Canon EF 85/1.8 or EF 50/1.4
Bergger Pancro 400 developed with Berspeed 1+1 during 12'@20ºC
TMAX Fixer 6'
1.


2.


3.


4


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.

Trix!! But I prefer the "original" ... or even HP5, actually.
A bit cambered once dried ... not so easy to scan. Nearly free of dust.
I'll try XTOL next time.
Cheers!
Antonio
 
They look great shots Antonio.
For my first go using Pancro 400 in a Nikon FA, I could not find any information on developing in Caffenol, so I cut the roll in half and developed in Rodinal 1+25 per Bergger specs and the other half in Caffenol C-L per this recipe (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

This was the frame that was cut through and developed separately then joined in the scanner for the comparison. And I know there is a line which I think I have found the cause of.

Caffenol results

Rodinal results


Am interested in your thoughts?
Regards
Robin
 
I just filled up a 35mm roll of Pancro 400 with bracketed shots, nothing exciting just some Helsinki city stuff.

So how should i develop this and post the results here?

Rodinal 1+25, 1+50; D76 1:1 ?
 
Hi!
Thank you for sharing! Very interesting comparation.
I think that caffenol gives more contrast. No grain or nearly negligible in both.
I'll try with Xtol 1+1 next time. I want to compare with the negatives I got with the 120 version of the film ;-)
I also will try with Rodinal 1+50.

Cheers!
Antonio

locutus said:
I just filled up a 35mm roll of Pancro 400 with bracketed shots, nothing exciting just some Helsinki city stuff.

So how should i develop this and post the results here?

Rodinal 1+25, 1+50; D76 1:1 ?
Click to expand...

Hi!!

I'd try with Rodinal 1+50 ;-) ...

Thank you!
Cheers
Antonio
 
Ho ho, i just read the datasheet. 20 minutes development time for Rodinal 1:50!

Well i suppose so.....
 
Thanks for posting these. I recently bought two boxes of Berspeed from Macodirect specifically to see how it pushed various films. Looking at photos in Flickr for "berspeed" shows some nice shots with smooth tones and less grain than other push developers. I do think there was "old" Berspeed and now "new" Berspeed, so it's hard to know what one is looking at.
 
Developed my first roll of Pancro in 1+50, negatives are hanging to dry. 22 Minutes with a inversion every minute got a tiny bit tedious, next time I will do 1+25!

To the eye: all exposures look usable (bracketed 400/800), film is nice and flat, no visible defects.

Will scan and upload tomorrow once they are dry.
 
All shots using my Leica R8 with 35/2 50/2 and 80/1.4 lenses, most matrix metered:















Full album at: http://imgur.com/a/nX2Hw

I really like this film, lovely tone and very versatile.

Sadly it seems that with this long development scheme I get some veiling in deep shadowsin a couple of shots. Its visible in the TLR and birds nests.

Next roll, D76!
 
Hello, locutus!

I like your results very much!
Very good midtones ... as expected I guess. You achieved a nice contrast as well !
Grain ... negligible !
Congratulations!

Antonio
 
Thanks

I really like the tone and contrast of this film (its contrast curve seems to go on forever), but i would have expected a bit less grain.

I have a roll loaded to be developed with D76, lets see in ~2 weeks when i have filled it up.
 
locutus said:
Thanks

I really like the tone and contrast of this film (its contrast curve seems to go on forever), but i would have expected a bit less grain.

I have a roll loaded to be developed with D76, lets see in ~2 weeks when i have filled it up.
Click to expand...


Don't scam B&W film. That's why.
 
Semi-stand developed for in 500ml 1:100 Rodinol + 1/8 tsp Borax for 70 minutes at 20c (cont. inversions for first 60 seconds, then again for 10 seconds at 30 min mark).
 

Attachments

  • 34086657975_24d195bb65_k.jpg
    569.3 KB · Views: 271
  • 33244754134_c8e326de07_k.jpg
    658.1 KB · Views: 287
  • 33244770664_66e64af38a_k.jpg
    599.5 KB · Views: 271
  • 33702514670_6afd9ec852_k.jpg
    528.7 KB · Views: 253
  • 33244784744_bdf61b5b9b_k.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 280
  • 33929985632_cafe5a7799_k.jpg
    922.8 KB · Views: 273
locutus said:
Sorry for the question, what is the borax for?
Click to expand...

"Even though unadulterated Rodinal produces clean negatives, 1 gram of borax per liter of 1+50 working solution reduces fog slightly and reduces graininess a bit as well. "
From here: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html

I find that it helps reduce the streaking on my negatives which are typical of stand developing (that plus the inversions at the half-way point help a great deal).
 

That is a very interesting article, thank you. I have not had much success with stand development of Rodinal as it has caused the streaks, and or stripped the film to clear and sparkly. Subsequently I have stuck to experimenting with Caffenol which has been more consistent and reliable for me as a beginner. Your photos look excellent to my untrained eye so what is your expert opinion of the Caffenol developed photos I posted earlier in this discussion? Do you think I can improve my results with the Rodinal + Borax stand method you use? Feel free to be totally honest. Thanks.
Robin.
 

I hardly consider my opinion "expert", but I'd say that my Rodinol method will produce more grainy results than your Caffenol. I'd say stick with the Caffenol, unless you feel adventurous.

Here are some shots from a roll of Pancro 400 135 that I developed in 1:1 Xtol (per box instructions).
 

Attachments

  • 33874882145_927d5e75c6_k.jpg
    531.6 KB · Views: 244
  • 33833675466_b5e4564970_o.jpg
    901.6 KB · Views: 264
  • 33030880334_8cb3af7908_o.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 235
  • 33030886854_bdb93b507e_o.jpg
    790.8 KB · Views: 242
  • 33030890814_dbaf4109ba_o.jpg
    917.5 KB · Views: 261
  • 33030883434_f667bf490f_k.jpg
    747.4 KB · Views: 232
photowang said:
I hardly consider my opinion "expert", but I'd say that my Rodinol method will produce more grainy results than your Caffenol. I'd say stick with the Caffenol, unless you feel adventurous.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your advice PhotoWang. Your photos have developed nicely in the Xtol. I stuck with the Caffenol this time but I am adventurous and will try the Rodinal with the Borax. I was using a Polariser filter with some shots and they came out more grainy than expected although this is more a result of my poor camera work than the film.

A few more photos using Pancro 400 in a Nikon FA shot at Freycinet National Park Tasmania and developed in Caffenol C-L.
The oyster shells are an Aboriginal Midden. For thousands of years the local tribes feasted on their oysters in these spots overlooking the Hazards beach area.
 
This is becoming quite a informative thread, thank you for your results!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register