Bergger Pancro 400, anyone?

[removedacct3]

Very cool. I never used Edwal 10 but I understand it has similarities to D76?

I do not know ... never used D76. But I think I do like it over D23. In my (very) limited experience I like the skin tones of Edwal 10 over D23's tones.

 

[fs999]

Plaubel Makina 67
Bergger Pancro 400 film developped in Caffenol CLCS 80min @15°-20°C
Scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 at 2400dpi with Silverfast AI Studio

Bonnieux • Lubéron • Vaucluse • Provence • France


Caffenol CLCS
500 ml Filtered Water
8gr Anhydrous Washing Soda
5gr Vitamin C
0.5gr KBr
20gr Instant coffee ("Cora")
60 sec. slow agitations then let stand for 79 minutes

 

[Auer]

Plaubel Makina 67
Bergger Pancro 400 film developped in Caffenol CLCS 80min @15°-20°C
Scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 at 2400dpi with Silverfast AI Studio

Bonnieux • Lubéron • Vaucluse • Provence • France


Caffenol CLCS
500 ml Filtered Water
8gr Anhydrous Washing Soda
5gr Vitamin C
0.5gr KBr
20gr Instant coffee ("Cora")
60 sec. slow agitations then let stand for 79 minutes

Great shot, and a convincing endorsement for Pancro 400 and Caffenol.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Plaubel Makina 67
Bergger Pancro 400 film developped in Caffenol CLCS 80min @15°-20°C
Scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 at 2400dpi with Silverfast AI Studio

Bonnieux • Lubéron • Vaucluse • Provence • France


Caffenol CLCS
500 ml Filtered Water
8gr Anhydrous Washing Soda
5gr Vitamin C
0.5gr KBr
20gr Instant coffee ("Cora")
60 sec. slow agitations then let stand for 79 minutes

Just curious as to what you rated your BP400 at? I have 5 rolls of 120 and a box of 4x5 to try. I might just have to try some coffee-soup developer one of these days?

 

[Bazza D]

I think it is better a little overexposed but I like it. I tend to underexpose and that tends to accentuate the grain in Pancro. I am not really a fan of any 400 film. I would never shoot over 125 if I could get away with it. But winter, cloudy days and the indoors make that difficult. I like it at 200 but think the next time I use it I might try 320. I think the developer used is important for Pancro. I used Ilfosol 3 and it is grainy. But Ilfosol 3 is a low speed developer. I've used it with Iso 6 cinema films and it is beautiful. I don't think it Ilfosol 3 should be used past 125. It can be but probably shouldn't be.
Pancro400 35mm @ Iso 200 in Ilfosol 3

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Pancro 400 @ 200 in Bergger Superfine.
GF670.

You can 'somewhat' tame the grain and certainly bring out a really nice tonal range with Superfine.

 

[fs999]

Great shot, and a convincing endorsement for Pancro 400 and Caffenol.

Thank you !

Just curious as to what you rated your BP400 at?

400 ISO. The "cold start" makes the difference. I add 10 minutes to the CL recipe and start at 15°C (59°F), with a prewash to avoid reticulation, and rise 2 times the temperature during the development to 20°C (68°F).

 

[Auer]

Follow the crumbs by Eric Auer, on Flickr

 

[Pat Erson]

After a rather underwhelming exp with this film exposed at 400 iso (horible grain empty shadows) I decided to try it at 100 and process it with my Hp-5 (D-76 1+1 for 13 minutes).
And this time I got satisfying results : a tamed grain, a nice tonal range and "fleshy" shadows.

 

[Auer]

I like it at box speed and the grain is great.



City Frame-355 by Eric Auer, on Flickr

 

[markbau]

After a rather underwhelming exp with this film exposed at 400 iso (horible grain empty shadows) I decided to try it at 100 and process it with my Hp-5 (D-76 1+1 for 13 minutes).
And this time I got satisfying results : a tamed grain, a nice tonal range and "fleshy" shadows.

I concur. A few years ago I got a few rolls of 120 and did a zone I test. I needed an EI of 50 to get a decent zone I density. I don't recall the developer I used (possibly D76 1:1) and maybe this film exhausts developer quicker than other films but at that point I gave up on it. Life's too short to mess around with products so far from the norm.

 

[radiant]

The previous examples posted here look very underexposed / pushed - and while scanning? I would assume darkroom printing this film is a pain ..

 

[Auer]

Obviously not a film for everyone

 

[Auer]

Life's too short to mess around with products so far from the norm.

Norms arent everything.
Life is only short if you rush and dont enjoy it.

 

[radiant]

I like Pancro 400 a lot, but its not the easiest film to work with: for my needs, it must be exposed at 160 ASA to get sufficient shadow information. I found it to be horrible in Rodinal/R09, since that developer makes the shadow detail even more difficult to retain. (not to mention the horrible things Rodinal does to its grain). I find Pancro 400 to be too coarse in 35mm format, and barely usable in 120, but the sheet film sizes can be exquisite when exposed and developed properly. This photograph is made on 8x10 inch Pancro 400 @ 160 ASA, processed in PMK Pyro:

View attachment 272737

Ok, this explains previous photos. Somehow Pancro reminds me of Foma 400.

BTW: Beautiful photo because of the "strange" (in a good way) tonality.

Is there H+D curve for the film somewhere? It would be interesting to see how it responds to light.

 

[Pat Erson]

products so far from the norm.

This.
It's a good film with an E.I. of 100-125 as it's certainly NOT a 400 iso emulsion. As it was drying next to my HP5 I noticed the film base was most peculiar, as if it wasn't properly fixed (it's only an impression, my Ilford film looked fine).

I'll gladly use the 11 rolls I still have... then I'll go back to my trusty HP-5 (which is a true 400 iso film).

 

[Oren Grad]

Is there H+D curve for the film somewhere? It would be interesting to see how it responds to light.

https://bergger.com/en/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=4

 

[radiant]

https://bergger.com/en/index.php?controller=attachment&id_attachment=4

Maybe to be more exact: H+D from some other source then the company marketing the product.

How I wish manufacturers would use lux seconds as exposure scale. It is not that hard. But I assume it is because then you would see the real ISO.

 

[Paul Howell]

I could not better than 200, from the pervious post maybe 100 would be closer to true ISO for most developers. I used F76+ with D76 times which help with the grain. For me 35mm is out of the question, maybe 6X9, likely fine in 4X5.

 

[eurekaiv]

One of my favorite photos ever I shot on Pancro but it seems to have about as much grain on 6x9 as FP4 on 35mm. I developed in HC-110 B for the recommended time and shot at box speed. I didn't feel like my shadows were too clogged up but I can see how a little overexposure might have been welcome. This film is REALLY CURLY. This is the biggest problem I had with it really..

 

[abruzzi]

I don’t mind the grain, but I shoot it on 4x5. I’ve been relatively satisfied with about EI320 developed in PyrocatHD, but I don’t remember my dev times (they’re written down somewhere) but it’s pretty long (pyro isn’t a fast developer like HC110)

 

[Craig75]

Is it different grain to hp5+

I've looked at so many images I deliberately grained up in hp5 that I could do with looking at different grain pattern

 

[Paul Howell]

Wonder about a p-Phenylenediamine developer like Edwal 12 or MCM 100.

 

[markjwyatt]

I have been metering at 320 and developing in HC110B for 400. Seems like Pancro400 has a broad toe and the shadows can be tricky. I like some of the results though.


Hill Trees by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr


palm by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

 

[Auer]

I have been metering at 320 and developing in HC110B for 400. Seems like Pancro400 has a broad toe and the shadows can be tricky. I like some of the results though.


Hill Trees by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr


palm by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Lovely shots Mark, thanks for sharing,