Developer recommendations for Pan-F

[Kvistgaard]

Hi all,

Does someone have experience with developing Pan-F in D-76? - what do the results look like in terms of tonality and grain?

Alternatively - would you have a developer recommendation for Pan-F (@50 ISO) which will give optimal tonality?

Thanks!

/Søren

 

[reellis67]

You're likely to get a slew of opinins here, so be ready. For my eye, Pan F+ is only OK in D-76. I much prefer to use an acutance developer like Rodinal or FX-2 with this film. I don't have any examples online right now, not that you could really see much in them on a computer screen anyway, but I find the D-76 results a bit mushy compared to the results from other developers.

I would certainly recommend shooting a test roll to see the results with what you have on hand. Keep that roll handy and then try some other recommendations from here. Once you have a few different rolls, print one or two negatives from each and lay the prints side by side to see what *you* think. The neat thing about Pan F+ is that obtrusive grain is rarely a problem so go nuts with it.

- Randy

 

[Lee Shively]

You might want to give it a try with D76 1:3. I've used that and it's almost "Rodinal-like". But I do like it in Rodinal a little better.

 

[Gerald Koch]

The reason for using a slow film like Pan F is for the detail that it can record. A solvent type developer like D-76 will destroy this fine detail unless it is used diluted 1+2 or 1+3. A better choice would be to use one of the many acutance developers like the Beutler developer, FX-1 or FX-2. Among commercial developers you will get excellent results with Neofin Blue, Ethol TEC, or Rodinal.

Be careful not to over develop this film as it builds density very rapidly.

 

[jim appleyard]

I've done some Pan-F in D-76 1+3. At that dilution it is less of a solvent dev than 1+0. I do Pan-F for 15 min at this dilution and have gotten some very nice negs.

However, Rodinal is my first choice. It gives me a little more in the way of "guts" to the neg.; good for my diffuser enlarger.

A lot of this depends on what you're shooting. A contrasty subject may require D-76 1+3. A less contrasty subject may require Rodinal. You can always tweak things with a higher grade of paper or filter.

It might be better to ask, "What devs DON'T I use for Pan-F?

 

[tom_bw]

I have a post on my blog that gives an example of PanF+ developed in Perceptol 1:3 on a bright sunny 'high contrast' day (see the article "Shedding light on the Edge of Darkness"). I believe this combination provides reasonable contrast / tonality for the film under these conditions. As for Perceptol dissolving grain, diluted 1:3 I can still see the grain in an 8X10" print from a 6X7cm negative... The downside - I exposed at ISO 20. My blog is at: http://tomsphotoworld.blogspot.com/

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Perceptol (or Microdol-X) diluted 1:3 should give results that are very close to D-76 1:3.

However, I prefer Rodinal to any of the above with PanF+. I also like PanF+ in FX-2.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agee with Tom, I use Rodinal for pan F or Adox 25, sharp, great detrails, contast and grain.

 

[kb244]

I've used Kodak HC-110 Dilution B for PanF with good results.

Here is one such image.



*Click to Enlarge.

I don't remeber the exact development time, but I believe it was right around 5 to 5.5 minutes @ 68F/20C

In the past when I went thru more rolls of film, I'd likely use ilford Ilfosol-S which seems to have a similar 'sharpening' result as Rodinal, though not quite. (I've only used Ilfosol, Microphen, Dektol, and HC-110 thus far).

Though panF depending on how you expose it and develop it can be extremely contrasty (rather easily so). Two such example on a roll of 35mm PanF+ (click to enlarge) both of which were also done in HC-110 (but at I beleive 4.5 mins or so).

 

[BrianPhotog]

DD-X if you can afford the extra $$$ or LC-29 (1+19) for economy. Both have worked great for me

 

[Trond]

I have used PanF in D-76 with great results in the past. I didn't notice any problems with fine details. The tonality was great too. I usually exposed it after ISO25. Why not just try it out, and compare it with other combinations if you want?

Trond

 

[gbenaim]

I second the call for Rodinal. They're both tonally rich, and complement each other very well. Try it at 1:50. I've only used it in 120, but imagine the grain will be tolerable even in 35mm. I also find it very contrasty if not kept under control. Do run some tests. Enjoy!

 

[reellis67]

While I mostly use 120 and sheet films, I have used Pan F+ in 35mm with Rodinal at 1:100 and 1:200 and gotten fantastic results. If you can work with the slower film speed, grain should not be a problem even in 35mm with Rodinal.

- Randy

 

[Bruce Osgood]

I've used Pan F (35mm @ 25) with D76 recently and while the results were fine, they were just fine. Next time I will try Neofin Blu (Buelers ) or just make life simple and use Rodinal - always a winner, even good on toast.

 

[jmailand]

Rodinal 1:50, or 1:100 for high contrast scenes. Also Perceptol 1:3 but you lose a stop of film speed. I have couple 1:50 Rodinal print examples in the wash right now I'm was going to put them in my gallery when they dry, probably later today
if you want to see some examples.

James,

 

[Les McLean]

I've used Rodinal and Pan F, 9 mins at 1 to 50, for years and got terrific results and agree with all the other comments here about this combination. See attached example.

 

[Ole]

I've used Pan F (35mm @ 25) with D76 recently and while the results were fine, they were just fine. Next time I will try Neofin Blu (Buelers ) or just make life simple and use Rodinal - always a winner, even good on toast.

I think you might be surprised at the difference between Beutler's Acutance Developer and Rodinal.

I was, and I know which of the two I'll use for 35mm and MF where grain size matters!

 

[Bruce Osgood]

I think you might be surprised at the difference between Beutler's Acutance Developer and Rodinal.

I was, and I know which of the two I'll use for 35mm and MF where grain size matters!

HMMMMMM, you pique my interest.... My thought was Beutlers might provide acutance to 35mm enlargements that may be lost with Rodinal.

"I know which of the two I'll use" Care to share?

 

[Roger Hicks]

This is probably the finest grained general-application film on the market today, though not the sharpest: Delta 100 beats it in almost all developers. Which developer you use will affect grain size and sharpness. With the right exposure it will stand up to almost anything, including Rodinal. Exposure is however far more critical than with many faster films: +2/3, -1/3 will make a difference, and true ISO can range from around 25 to little short of 100 while personal EI can go further.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[kb244]

This is probably the finest grained general-application film on the market today, though not the sharpest: Delta 100 beats it in almost all developers. Which developer you use will affect grain size and sharpness. With the right exposure it will stand up to almost anything, including Rodinal. Exposure is however far more critical than with many faster films: +2/3, -1/3 will make a difference, and true ISO can range from around 25 to little short of 100 while personal EI can go further.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

Hrm I seem to differ when it comes to Delta 100. Perhaps just my development process but Delta 100 compared to say FP4+ , PanF+, Tmax 100, Fuji Neopan Acros 100, just seems chunkier where as the rest are quite sharp. Though I havent found anything to be sharper than my batch of Kodak UltraTec or Panatomic-X, but I Think both of those films had a different purpose and may have more 'appearance' of sharpness in it's grain or contrast than actual sharpness. (But damn is ultratec sharp, cept I gota shoot it at like ISO 6 ).

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I forgot to note: I have put this film through Diafine at 80. Very grainy and interesting for portraits, but not much else.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hrm I seem to differ when it comes to Delta 100.

How much exposure are you giving it? Overexposure wrecks 'New Technology' films (Delta/T-grain) much faster than 'old technology' films.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Gerald Koch]

I've used Pan F (35mm @ 25) with D76 recently and while the results were fine, they were just fine. Next time I will try Neofin Blu (Buelers ) or just make life simple and use Rodinal - always a winner, even good on toast.

Interestingly the Neofin Blue MSDS of 7/4/2003 lists both Metol and Phenidone with potassium carbonate rather than sodium carbonate. This is in contrast with the typical Beutler formula which uses only Metol as the developing agent and also uses sodium carbonate.

Rodinal is not a particularly good acutance developer. Most acutance developers contain Metol because of the unique properties of this developing agent. For an acutance developer, the developing agent must be sensitive to bromide concentration but not too sensitive.

 

[Bruce Osgood]

Interestingly the Neofin Blue MSDS of 7/4/2003 lists both Metol and Phenidone with potassium carbonate rather than sodium carbonate. This is in contrast with the typical Beutler formula which uses only Metol as the developing agent and also uses sodium carbonate.

Rodinal is not a particularly good acutance developer. Most acutance developers contain Metol because of the unique properties of this developing agent. For an acutance developer, the developing agent must be sensitive to bromide concentration but not too sensitive.

Ok, I got it straight now. I just processed some Pan F+ @ EI 25 in the Cookbooks' Beutler's High Definition Developer #105. As you state, there is no Phenidone and Part B is Sodium Carbonate - Anhy. There is no Bromide in either Part A or Part B.

Based upon the Massive Development Chart I selected a ratio of 1+1+10 for 8min. at 68-F. Next time I will try 1+1+8 and then try 10 minutes if necessary.

Beutler's HD #105 is my developer of choice for 35mm slow films - right now.

 

[Gerald Koch]

There is no Bromide in either Part A or Part B.

Based upon the Massive Development Chart I selected a ratio of 1+1+10 for 8min. at 68-F. Next time I will try 1+1+8 and then try 10 minutes if necessary.

Beutler's HD #105 is my developer of choice for 35mm slow films - right now.

Sorry, I did not mean to imply that the stock solutions contained bromide but meant that acutance developers in general depend on the local buildup of bromide in the emulsion to restrain development. This bromide is released by the emulsion during development. It is this restraining action in part that is responsible for the edge effects

However, Willi Beutler in his book, stated that 5 to 10 ml of a 1% solution of potassium bromide could be added to every 500 ml of working strength developer. Another common additive advocated by Geoffrey Crawley is a
small amount of a very dilute solution of potassium iodide. Typically 2.5 ml of a 0.001% solution is added per liter of working solution. This is said to reduce flare and increase sharpness.

Also from Beutler's book, the recommended dilution is 1 part A +1 part B + 8 parts water. Somehow in last few years this has been transmogrified to 1+1+10.

The number #105 often associated with the Beutler formula is the number of this formula in the Anchell book. It has really nothing to do with the formula and Beutler certain did not use it.