Bergger Pancro and Rodinal

[Pieter12]

I got a few rolls of Bergger Pancro 400 in 120 and I was thinking of rating it at ISO 200 and developing it in Rodinal 1+25. Has anyone done this with satisfactory results and what development time do you use? Bergger only gives times for box speed or pushed, same with the Massive Development Chart.

 

[Auer]

There doesnt seem to be much info on pulling this film, personally I have always shot it at box speed, sorry.

 

[Pieter12]

Interesting, because I had read that 200 is a better rating for it.

 

[Pieter12]

I wet print exclusively. A flatter negative is more versatile, more shadow detail if I choose to bring it out.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Perfectly fine to rate it between 200 and 320 with no development modification unless you have some kind of system that depends on perfectly uniform densities.

Pancro is a weird film that is incredibly grainy. Rodinal may be worth a try but only if you want that super hard and very grainy look. Based on my experiments I think it likes XTol best followed closely by D76. I run them straight to shorted the obnoxiously long development time. It also likes a prewet.

Beware the backing paper mottling issue that has been effecting almost every roll that comes out of the Ilford factory. I've seen it on every roll of Pancro in 120 I've processed. I see it on almost every 120 roll of Ilford film I process at the moment.

 

[Pieter12]

Thanks for the input. The grain in the ISO 400 samples processed in Rodinal posted on the Bergger site looks fine to me. But the mottling issue is a much a bigger problem. HP5+ has been my mainstay, and I just experienced the mottling on a recent roll for the first time.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Thanks for the input. The grain in the ISO 400 samples processed in Rodinal posted on the Bergger site looks fine to me. But the mottling issue is a much a bigger problem. HP5+ has been my mainstay, and I just experienced the mottling on a recent roll for the first time.

After loving the 35mm version of Pancro I shot my own Covid wedding on the 120 stock and every roll was mottled. All those precious images. Then the factory tried to tell me that it's my fault, which is hogwash as I know how to handle a roll o film thankyouverymuch.

 

[mdarragh]

You might find this information useful, Pieter. It doesn't address your specific combination but does give a useful overview of the film in various developers

https://viewcameraaustralia.org/2017/09/10/review-bergger-pancro400-roll-film-david-tatnall/

All the best

 

[Pieter12]

You might find this information useful, Pieter. It doesn't address your specific combination but does give a useful overview of the film in various developers

https://viewcameraaustralia.org/2017/09/10/review-bergger-pancro400-roll-film-david-tatnall/

All the best

Again, thanks for the link, good information there. A while back, I remember coming a cross a (German, maybe?) site that had examples of various film and developer combinations. Anyone know about that one?

 

[removedacct1]

Pancro 400 is the WORST when processed with Rodinal; clumpy coarse grain, loss of shadow information, blown out highlights, difficult to print, etc. Plain old D-76 1:1 is a better option, Xtol is good too. PMK is vastly superior.

 

[Pieter12]

Maybe for 35mm. I like grain as long as it is accompanied by sharpness. That's why I use Rodinal and a condenser enlarger. This example of 120 Pancro 400 in Rodinal from Bergger's website seems fine with me. But I am concerned about the mottling mentioned earlier.

 

[lecarp]

You may find this thread useful at LFF.
https://www.largeformatphotography....Pancro-400-in-sheets&highlight=Bergger+pancro

 

[removedacct3]

A while back, I remember coming a cross a (German, maybe?) site that had examples of various film and developer combinations. Anyone know about that one?

Is this the one you were looking for: https://fotoimport.no/filmDelta100

 

[removedacct1]

Maybe for 35mm. I like grain as long as it is accompanied by sharpness. That's why I use Rodinal and a condenser enlarger. This example of 120 Pancro 400 in Rodinal from Bergger's website seems fine with me. But I am concerned about the mottling mentioned

If you’ve already decided you like the hard grain look of Rodinal, then I’m puzzled why you’d ask about this film/developer combo. It seems you’ve already made a choice.
As for the backing paper mottling/transfer issue, I’ve observed it on every 120 film I’ve used in the past 2 years. If you buy fresh film and use it within months of purchase, odds are better that you won’t see the problem, but I recently processed rolls (all within their freshness date) of Tri-X, TMY, Pancro 400, Delta 400, and FP4 and all of them displayed the issue to some degree. Some rolls were closer to their expiration date than others. (URL links to results from an expired roll of Delta 100 I shot in 2019 and processed two weeks ago: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50797307406_a028e62f82_b.jpg And no, I don’t typically wait two years to develop exposed rolls - this was found in a drawer in my darkroom)

My plan is to buy fresh 120 stock only when I expect to use it, and no longer keep a cache of it.

 

[wyofilm]

I’ve observed it on every 120 film I’ve used in the past 2 years. If you buy fresh film and use it within months of purchase, odds are better that you won’t see the problem, but I recently processed rolls (all within their freshness date) of Tri-X, TMY, Pancro 400, Delta 400, and FP4 and all of them displayed the issue to some degree.

You have me worried although I've never seen mottling. The closest I came was seeing the well known Kodak transfer a couple of years ago. For b&w 120 I primarily shoot Ilford film, though in 120 I've also shot Rollie and Pancro 400 in the last year. I live in a dry environment and keep film either in a freezer or refrigerator. Otherwise, I'm not handling film in any special way. I might go an shoot my oldest roll of b/w 120 to see if I have a problem.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Pancro 400 is the WORST when processed with Rodinal; clumpy coarse grain, loss of shadow information, blown out highlights, difficult to print, etc. Plain old D-76 1:1 is a better option, Xtol is good too. PMK is vastly superior.

How was the base fog in D-76 1+1, XTOL, and PMK? I was shocked at how high it was in Pyrocat-HD. Was still able to make a decent print though...never seen so much B+F!

 

[removedacct1]

How was the base fog in D-76 1+1, XTOL, and PMK? I was shocked at how high it was in Pyrocat-HD. Was still able to make a decent print though...never seen so much B+F!

Andrew,
base+fog is highest when I develop in PMK, it seems. Its less in either D-76 or Xtol, and better still when processed with BER49 (Atomal49) but the differences are minor except the PMK negs, which have conspicuously more fog. Regardless of which developer you use, Pancro400 has the most base density of any film I currently use. (and the list includes pretty much all of the major brands/formulas)

 

[Pieter12]

If you’ve already decided you like the hard grain look of Rodinal, then I’m puzzled why you’d ask about this film/developer combo. It seems you’ve already made a choice.
As for the backing paper mottling/transfer issue, I’ve observed it on every 120 film I’ve used in the past 2 years. If you buy fresh film and use it within months of purchase, odds are better that you won’t see the problem, but I recently processed rolls (all within their freshness date) of Tri-X, TMY, Pancro 400, Delta 400, and FP4 and all of them displayed the issue to some degree. Some rolls were closer to their expiration date than others. (URL links to results from an expired roll of Delta 100 I shot in 2019 and processed two weeks ago: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50797307406_a028e62f82_b.jpg And no, I don’t typically wait two years to develop exposed rolls - this was found in a drawer in my darkroom)

My plan is to buy fresh 120 stock only when I expect to use it, and no longer keep a cache of it.

I am specifically asking if anyone had rated Pancro 400 at 200 and processed it inRodinal, looking for developing times. What portion of the negative are you showing in your Delta 100 mottling example?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew,
base+fog is highest when I develop in PMK, it seems. Its less in either D-76 or Xtol, and better still when processed with BER49 (Atomal49) but the differences are minor except the PMK negs, which have conspicuously more fog. Regardless of which developer you use, Pancro400 has the most base density of any film I currently use. (and the list includes pretty much all of the major brands/formulas)

Interesting. Thanks for that, Paul.

 

[removedacct1]

I am specifically asking if anyone had rated Pancro 400 at 200 and processed it inRodinal, looking for developing times. What portion of the negative are you showing in your Delta 100 mottling example?

That’s the entire 6x6 cm negative area, no cropping.

And yes, I’ve processed Pancro 400 in Rodinal before, rating it at 200ASA, and I hated the results - harsh clumpy grain, poor shadow information, generally a harsh, excessively contrasty look. i found that to get decent shadow detail with Rodinal, I had to rate it at 160 or 125ASA. It is my personal opinion that this film is not well suited to development in Rodinal, although 1:50 dilution is slightly better.

I use development times gleaned from Dev Chart, sometimes adjusting shorter to suppress contrast.

 

[removedacct1]

Interesting. Thanks for that, Paul.

Andrew, out of curiosity I did a test this afternoon using Bergger Pancro 400 (with my Kodak Duo Six-20) and processed it in Divided D-23 to see how it affected contrast, base fog, etc. As it happens, the negatives were really nice and the base fog was lower than I expected. You might want to experiment with that developer as an option. However, the best frames came from exposures that set the ASA at about 160, which is how I rate it for PMK as well. Here is a sample image from the divided D-23 roll:

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew, out of curiosity I did a test this afternoon using Bergger Pancro 400 (with my Kodak Duo Six-20) and processed it in Divided D-23 to see how it affected contrast, base fog, etc. As it happens, the negatives were really nice and the base fog was lower than I expected. You might want to experiment with that developer as an option. However, the best frames came from exposures that set the ASA at about 160, which is how I rate it for PMK as well. Here is a sample image from the divided D-23 roll:

View attachment 264356

That's good to know as I do use D-23 when I develop Pan F. Thanks for letting me know!

 

[removedacct1]

That's good to know as I do use D-23 when I develop Pan F. Thanks for letting me know!

Andrew, are you using the two part D~23 recipe on Pan F?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew, are you using the two part D~23 recipe on Pan F?

I'm using it at 1+3, actually. Never thought about using it as a two bath with Pan F. I did use two bath many years ago with HP5, and was impressed at how well it worked. I'll give it a try with Pan F.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Andrew, out of curiosity I did a test this afternoon using Bergger Pancro 400 (with my Kodak Duo Six-20) and processed it in Divided D-23 to see how it affected contrast, base fog, etc. As it happens, the negatives were really nice and the base fog was lower than I expected. You might want to experiment with that developer as an option. However, the best frames came from exposures that set the ASA at about 160, which is how I rate it for PMK as well. Here is a sample image from the divided D-23 roll:

View attachment 264356

beautiful Paul