Current Film Most Like Plus X

[braxus]

Waiting for Kodak to reintroduce this film today is like pulling teeth. I question if it will ever happen. I sold my 4x5 sheets of this film and Im regretting that decision, as I kept the FP4+ film instead. I find FP4+ has a different look then Plus X. Plus X seems to have better or more contrast with deeper blacks. This film looks really good on outdoor landscape photos in the sun. So I checked my stash. I still have some Plus X in 35mm, but no 120 and as mentioned no 4x5. I do have some Efke 100 which is sort of close. But that film is long gone as well.

What film today has the closest look to Plus X when using regular developers? I send my stuff to a lab in Vancouver, since I can't and won't do it here myself. I just want consistency in my film developing and the lab offers the services I need for the film.

I looked at Fomapan, but doesn't that film need special development? Not sure if Rollei or Adox offer anything close to Plus X. I just wish Kodak would release a new batch of this stuff, along with Panatomic X as well. I do see Adox CHS II in all formats, but have yet to use a roll of it. Never used RPX 100 either. I do buy films from Freestyle, so there is my source.

 

[MattKing]

I wouldn't hold my breath on ever seeing Plus-X again. I doubt there is any business argument for doing so.
I still have some 35mm, but I'm down to my last roll of 120.
I'm working on adapting T-Max 100 for my slow-medium speed needs, and have achieved some success.
But I expect that Tri-X is the closest you will find, if you aren't doing your own development.

 

[takilmaboxer]

When it was being discontinued, I did an experiment where I found development times that gave PX and FP4 identical gammas (contrast). Wet prints of the same subject shot at the same time were very hard to tell apart.So I switched to FP4.

 

[Peter Schrager]

I would really give foma 100 a try..I only use it in sheet film but I love the tonality
Xtol 1+2 should slow it down.it build contrast fast..cant give a recommendation for time as I develop in pyrocat by inspection
Lamenting gone products is a waste of time
Support current films..also give a nod to fp4
Just shoot it at 100 and blast away!!

 

[BradS]

Foma 100 is a pretty good choice but, I've never thought of it as being anything like Plus-X - not saying it isn't just that I never though of it that way.
Ilford's FP4+ is my main film in small format but, again, it is not anything like Plus-X to me.
Ilford Kentmere 100 is what I use when I want that Plus-X feeling.

 

[braxus]

Is RPX 100 anything like it? Someone mentioned APX 100, but that is only in smaller formats.

 

[Pieter12]

The somewhat contentious CATLABS 80 claims to be like Plus-X. Only in 120, 4x5 and 8x10 right now. I have shot 3 rolls and like the fine grain. I lost one roll to poor attachment of the film to the backing paper.

 

[Cholentpot]

Shanghai GP3 out of China is rumored to be a licence copy of Plus-X.

 

[BrianShaw]

Interesting rumour...

 

[Sirius Glass]

The somewhat contentious CATLABS 80 claims to be like Plus-X. Only in 120, 4x5 and 8x10 right now. I have shot 3 rolls and like the fine grain. I lost one roll to poor attachment of the film to the backing paper.

The detachment problem is the reason I have eliminated CATLABS 80 from any consideration until the problem is corrected and the poorly attached stock is flushed from the system.

 

[braxus]

I heard about GP3 in the past. Yes it was just a rumour about being like Plus X. No one could ever confirm it was a clone. It couldn't be because the speed is different for one. Plus the fact it didn't like developing variations unlike Kodak film. And the quality control issues with GP3. Why I never bought any.

 

[Cholentpot]

I heard about GP3 in the past. Yes it was just a rumour about being like Plus X. No one could ever confirm it was a clone. It couldn't be because the speed is different for one. Plus the fact it didn't like developing variations unlike Kodak film. And the quality control issues with GP3. Why I never bought any.

Never had an issue with it until they raised the price to idiot levels. I only bought it because it was cheap. The price point it's at now I might as well buy Tmax.

It was good for testing cameras and cutting up. I learned it and used it, I think I have 1-2 rolls left in the freezer.

 

[markbau]

I never used much Plus X, I didn't think it was much different to FP4, I do recall a shoot with strobes where the skin tones wouldn't print at all nicely no matter what I did but that was probably due to poor film development. The film I would love to see re-introduced in Verichrome Pan. Best B&W film ever in my opinion!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Shanghai GP3 out of China is rumored to be a licence copy of Plus-X.

China actually licensed something. Hard to believe they wouldn't just steal it. .

 

[Paul Howell]

I thought it was Lucky Film that had the partnership with Kodak, their color films were older version of Kodacolor or at lest in the old days with analog mini labs Lucky channeled as Kodacolor. In terms of best match for Plus X, PF4, Foma and Kentmeyer seem to way off. You might be able to get close to Plus X with Tmax 100 if you used Phil Davis low contrast developer he devised just for Tmax 100, maybe D23? I'm pretty happy with Ultrafine (Kentmeyer) 100 extream, I miss Verichome Pan, great landscape film.

 

[ozphoto]

Loved Plus-X, used to grab the short-dated stuff we sold at our local KMart and stick in the freezer; never understood why we stocked it, but certainly never complained until they removed it from the nationwide items list.

I like Fomapan 100 as well, it's close to Plus-X, but not the same - I guess like Agfapan, the chances of it being resurrected are almost zero, but we all thought that about Fuji Acros, so who knows?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I never used much Plus X, I didn't think it was much different to FP4, I do recall a shoot with strobes where the skin tones wouldn't print at all nicely no matter what I did but that was probably due to poor film development. The film I would love to see re-introduced in Verichrome Pan. Best B&W film ever in my opinion!

Verichrome Pan will not come back due to environmental issues from Cadmium if I remember correctly.

When Plus-X was discontinued I bought up what I could get and still have it in the freezer.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I used to print for a photographer who used 120 Plus-X when he went to China to photograph stream trains. I was really impressed with the tonalities, and lovely highlight contrasts. I started shooting some for myself. Was sad to see it go. I use FP4. It's close.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Sadly, Panatomic-X will never come back, either. I love the look and still have a few rolls of 120 left. A friend in Rochester who runs a lab said there were environmentally unfriendly chemicals used in the production. And it was slow (EI = 20 to 32 or so) in an era when people wanted faster films. For many photographers, TMax 100 provided similar fine grain but with a speed of around 100, so it was much more convenient. So it goes, all good things eventually pass.

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2017/05/panatomic-x-best-black-and-white-film.html

Experimenting with Lucky or Bergger Panchro would be fun, but I am in the old geezer stage of life and I really should stick with films whose characteristics I know well, (like Tri-X 400 or Panatomic-X). For the same reason, I have had almost all of my cameras overhauled and checked recently. No fooling around; I want them to work without surprises.

 

[koraks]

Plus X seems to have better or more contrast with deeper blacks.

Since these qualifications are a bit subjective and also dependent on processing and post-processing/printing, it may help to try and make a little more specific what kind of look you're after. Perhaps even some examples may make explicit what you're trying to achieve. Based on that, it could be more feasible to give recommendations. Otherwise we'll be rather stuck in everyone just saying what they personally prefer, which is not guaranteed to help you.

As to foma100: it does not require very specific processing, but I think all of us have preferences for how any given film needs to be exposed and processed; in that sense, foma100 would not be an exception.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Waiting for Kodak to reintroduce this film today is like pulling teeth. I question if it will ever happen. I sold my 4x5 sheets of this film and Im regretting that decision, as I kept the FP4+ film instead. I find FP4+ has a different look then Plus X. Plus X seems to have better or more contrast with deeper blacks. This film looks really good on outdoor landscape photos in the sun. So I checked my stash. I still have some Plus X in 35mm, but no 120 and as mentioned no 4x5. I do have some Efke 100 which is sort of close. But that film is long gone as well.

What film today has the closest look to Plus X when using regular developers? I send my stuff to a lab in Vancouver, since I can't and won't do it here myself. I just want consistency in my film developing and the lab offers the services I need for the film.

I looked at Fomapan, but doesn't that film need special development? Not sure if Rollei or Adox offer anything close to Plus X. I just wish Kodak would release a new batch of this stuff, along with Panatomic X as well. I do see Adox CHS II in all formats, but have yet to use a roll of it. Never used RPX 100 either. I do buy films from Freestyle, so there is my source.

I found my surrogat in Ilford FP4+;in Rodinalnot the same but close and what I like.

 

[JPD]

With deeper blacks, do you mean more details in the shadows? You are used to use Plus-X, so with whatever film you choose to try you will always have to get used to it and to print it as you like. No film will be exactly like Plus-X. You could try to learn FP4+, for example, expose it at 64, and develop it accordingly, to get more shadow details and then find the contrast filtering you like when printing. I haven't used FP4+ much, but it seems to have a little smoother grain than Plus-X, and maybe that is why Ralph Lambrecht likes it in Rodinal (for the crisper grain)?

Adox CHS 100 II only exists in sheet film formats at the moment, but will be available in roll formats again later when they can coat them. It's also a good film, but has a different spectral sensivity than Plus-X, since it's orthopanchromatic (darker reds than normal pan-film). Very fine grain and sharp film. CHS 100 II also likes a stop or so more exposure for better shadow details.

 

[NB23]

Plus-X’ grain and spectral sensitivity is what made it so very special.

I like to think fomapan 100 is the closest. And no, it doesn’t need any special developer, why would it?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Plus-X’ grain and spectral sensitivity is what made it so very special.

I like to think fomapan 100 is the closest. And no, it doesn’t need any special developer, why would it?

It probably is the closest match. They both do go out to about 660nm... Although the overall spectral graph is different...

 

[Paul Howell]

Seems that someone in China has restarted Lucky black and white film, 2017, could be their ISO 100 is close to Plus X made in 35mm and 4X5, have not seen any in the US. From Wiki

Film
black and white

• Lucky SHD100
• Lucky "New" SHD100 - 2017
• Lucky SHD400
• Lucky SHD400CN