Efke 100 speed

Flotsam · Nov 2, 2003

Quick reality check. I just wanted to compare notes with someone who has tried this film.
I've shot a couple of rolls of Efke 100 35mm (souped in D-76 1:1) and I'm having a problem with the exposure. While other 35mm B&W films that I shoot seems to expose at their marked ISO, Efke 100 seems to want about a stop and a half more exposure to give any decent shadow detail. Also, when I process Efke 50 rollfilm, the presoak pours out dark from the dissolved antihalation backing while the 35mm comes out clear. There seems to be bigger difference in these films than just speed and size.

Donald Miller · Nov 2, 2003

While I have not personally shot any of the Efke PL 100 film, I did have the opportunity to read densities on some Efke negatives that Jim Shanesy (C6H6O3) sent to me. The film does build density very well for alternative process and Azo. I believe that Jim had rated the film at less then the mfg speed (possibly 50). The low densities of these negatives indicated that the film was over exposed at the speed that Jim had rated the film.

The film that Jim sent to me had been developed in ABC Pyro and also Pyrocat. I could make a case that the developer that you are using is not as active as what we use when developing negatives to a higher DR. Therefore it may very well be that EI 50 is appropriate for the developer that you are using. (As one develops to a higher DR the film speed actually will show an effective increase.)

Metering and Zone placement are equally as important as the EI that one assigns to a film. I don't know what you are using as a meter and how involved you are in exposure calculations.

I have ordered some 4X5 Efke and should have more pertinant personal experience a little later.

Ole · Nov 3, 2003

This summer I used a mixture of PL100, APX 100 and FP4+: My last 4x5 APX, my first 9x13 PL100, and FP4+ in 5x7".

I can see no difference in shadow density on these three films developed in Pyrocat-HD by inspection. I have no densitometer and have not tested "properly", just shot similar scenes with all films at the same exposure. I judge my shadows when trying to print the negatives...

PL100 also contracts very well in compensating developers, making it possible to get full details over a 19-stop range.

c6h6o3 · Nov 3, 2003

I developed two 8 x 10 Efke PL100 negatives last night in ABC pyro. I had rated the film at 100. While there is good shadow detail, the highlights are a little thin and will probably necessitate grade 3 Azo right from the gitgo. The subject matter in this case made the negatives nearly impossible to inspect. (A white stucco wall. No highlights to stand out against it.)

I'm going back to 50 for this film. I've yet to find a film that I can rate at what the manufacturer recommends for development in ABC pyro.

Francesco · Nov 3, 2003

Try Pyrocat HD 2:2:100 with Efke PL 100 8x10 at the rated speed of 100. You will have no problem with both highlights and shadows. For a normal SBR of 8 try 9 mins 15 secs.

Aggie · Nov 3, 2003

Lex Jenkins · Nov 4, 2003

My only experience with Efke 100 has been with R100 (120 version) exposed at 100 and developed in Neofin Blau. Resolution was very crisp and grain well within acceptable bounds - tighter and finer than Rodinal.

The speed appears to be right at 100. I got good shadow detail and excellent midtones. It appears to have many of the qualities I enjoy in 120 APX 100.

The presoak effluent poured off a heavy dark greenish blue color. Only one shot was aimed into strongly backlit trees indicating the anti-halation treatment is probably necessary - there was some halation spillover into the margins.

You might try a roll in a developer like Rodinal, a Beutler type or something similar.

Flotsam · Nov 4, 2003

Hi Lex,
Your response was particularly helpful. I was beginning to think that I was the only one here that isn't using Pyro. For some reason at 100 everything under zone III just disappears. I definitely need to "overexpose". I am quite happy with the results in D-76 1:1, very fine grain, good sharpness and tone. A nice film to keep at least one camera body loaded with.

It's funny though, the 35mm doesn't discolor the presoak like the 120 does. I wonder how different the emulsions are?

Lex Jenkins · Nov 4, 2003

Nah, I don't use pyro type stuff...yet. I've adopted a one-in, one-out policy and I'm not sure which of my regular developers I'd be willing to give up to try another.

I think our individual metering habits affect our results more than we'd like to admit. Then you throw in meter calibration, etc., it's a wonder any of us ever agree on anything.

Regarding the presoak, I dunno. I recently tried some 35mm "Freestyle" ISO 50 film labeled Made in England. I assumed it was Pan F+ but it doesn't look like it. The raw film stock looks much different. The negatives are similar tho'. Absolutely no color in the presoak effluent. Who knows...presoaking is mostly voodoo anyway.

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 4, 2003

With some East European films that have a blue/green antihalation dye, I find the presoak necessary, because the dye doesn't necessarily come out in the fix/wash like the magenta dye in T-Max films. I'm experimenting with PL100, but haven't had a chance to process the first exposures yet.

galyons · Nov 5, 2003

I shoot efke in 25, 50 and 100 in 120 and 25 and 100 in 4x5. I rate the 100 at 50. Most of my testing and experience has been with ABC Pyro + in a Jobo. This film has great latitude. I have used D76 1:1 20c with 10 min and had very good results. ( a few of these batches were 35mm).

Have you tested to determine PEI and development time for your most frequently used films on your equipment?

Don't be discouraged by the initial disappointment. These are great films to work with! Just get them dialed into your system!

Cheers,
Geary

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 15, 2003

Okay, here's my first test of PL100 at EI 100 in PMK. Linhof Tech V, Xenar 150/4.5, handheld, probably around 1/125 sec at f:11:

What a nice looking film! And available in 11x14, no less! Here's a detail:

This is 4x5", processed in a Nikor stainless steel tank, 10 min. at 68 deg. F, agitating every 15 seconds. No PMK afterbath, but I did use a 2 minute presoak, which came out blue-green, so I'll stick with that procedure. The scan is strait from the neg with some curve adjustment, but no dodging or burning. I'll probably rate it at EI 80 for a little more shadow detail.

Flotsam · Nov 16, 2003

I agree.
I'm very happy with my results, grain and tone, from both Efke 50 120 and Efke 100 35mm.
I find that the 100 needs about ISO 40 for solid detail below III. Maybe further experimentation will find otherwise.

c6h6o3 · Nov 16, 2003

dnmilikan said:
The low densities of these negatives indicated that the film was over exposed at the speed that Jim had rated the film.

My flabby prints indicated that the film was both underexposed and underdeveloped. I've gone back to a rating of 50, I place the shadows on Zone IV and I now develop my PL100 in the 1:1:1:7 dilution of ABC pyro for 12 minutes. (Normal) This seems to have solved my lack of density problem.

Flotsam · Nov 16, 2003

c6h6o3 said:
I've gone back to a rating of 50, I place the shadows on Zone IV

I haven't brushed up on the zone system in a while but I thought that detailed shadow areas were generally placed on III. By placing them on IV aren't you effectively adding additional exposure? In other words, wouldn't you get the same results by rating at EI 25 and placing your shadows on III?

I'm curious because I started this thread wondering if anyone else found that Efke 100 needed fairly extreme ( over 1 stop) ISO adjustments to expose properly. Do your other films generally expose at their marked speeds?

c6h6o3 · Nov 16, 2003

Flotsam said:
c6h6o3 said:

I've gone back to a rating of 50, I place the shadows on Zone IV

Click to expand...

By placing them on IV aren't you effectively adding additional exposure? In other words, wouldn't you get the same results by rating at EI 25 and placing your shadows on III?

Yes

juan · Nov 16, 2003

Jim is talking about printing on Azo. Go to michaelandpaula.com - to the Azo forum/Developing Film to a post titled "ABC, pyrocat, film choice" for a long discussion.
The essence is that Azo may require a more dense negative than other papers. Read the whole thing, as they say.
juan

Aggie · Nov 16, 2003

doughowk · Nov 17, 2003

Since Efke is a thicker film, doesn't that impact resolution ( see Image Clarity by John Williams)? If so, can exposure/development be adjusted to minimize resolution problem?

juan · Nov 17, 2003

Aggie, I don't know anything about this other than the discussion over at Michael and Paula's site. I made some 4x5 negatives this weekend, one side shot with shadows at Zone II, the other of the identical scene with shadows at Zone IV, as Jim suggests. Perhaps traffic will allow me to get home in time tonight, and with enough energy left, to make some prints. Then I may have an opinion. Or more questions.

Doug, the discussion is not about resolution, but about getting "the glow" from the PL100/Azo combination. Jim's observation is that getting "the glow" with Azo requires a more dense negative - not contrasty, but dense.

Doug loaned me his BTZS book a month or so ago, and I read it with great interest. It gets far more intricate than I feel like getting with my personal photography right now, but I noticed one thing that struck me. I know many people get very good results using that method, so this is just observation, not criticism. In the book, everything moves along with a lot of precision until it gets to the topic of metering. The book recommends incident light metering in the sun, then metering in your own shadow to determine SBR of a distant scene - not metering the actual values of the scene itself (as I would do with my spotmeter.)

That tells me personal metering habits may be far more important than we (I ?) have given them credit for.

Again, I recommend anyone using Azo to read the thread at Michael and Paula's site - there's a great deal to at least think about there.
juan

doughowk · Nov 17, 2003

Just conjecture never having used the stuff, but I would think a thick emulsion film like Efke 100 would be good for contact prints/alt processes where you need a denser negative. On the obverse, though, a thick emulsion film tends to scatter the light as it penetrates deeper into the emulsion leading to loss of clarity. This, of course, is not good for those who wish to use negatives for enlargement and who are concerned about image resolution. Under-exposing the negative would help the latter, while increased exposure would benefit those doing contact prints.

Francesco · Nov 17, 2003

Actually Efle PL100 is a thin emulsion film. In fact, that is why it is so frustrating to use - it is easily scratched! BUT the effort is worth it. At least in my experience, when properly exposed and developed, it gives me the best negatives I have ever had. This films is so versatile that it can handle N+3 until N-3 no problem. And very consistent. Again, beware in handling it. Use kid gloves if you have to because it will scratch otherwise.

Ole · Nov 18, 2003

Francesco said:
Actually Efle PL100 is a thin emulsion film.

To the best of my knowledge, all available films are thin-emulsion. The EFKE films are based on the old ADOX recipe, which is said to have been the first. All others followed suit.

The thickness of the emulsion has no effect on the robustness of the film.

But I agree, EFKE does tend to scratch more easily.

doughowk · Nov 18, 2003

Stand corrected on thickness of Efke 100, was confusing it with J&C's Classic film ( a 2 layer film). John Williams book Image Clarity has an excellent chapter on film types including a discussion of emulsion thickness. He includes Plus-X, Tri-X & HP-4 as thick emulsion films, and says such films dominate the market. Quoting him, "the thick emulsion & coarse grain of general-purpose films trade off sharpness for exposure latitude... their strength is not in their image quality."

Efke 100 speed

Flotsam

Donald Miller

Ole

Moderator

c6h6o3

Francesco

Aggie

Lex Jenkins

Flotsam

Lex Jenkins

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

galyons

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Flotsam

c6h6o3

Flotsam

c6h6o3

juan

Aggie

doughowk

juan

doughowk

Francesco

Ole

Moderator

doughowk

Efke 100 speed

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency