Film Ferrania p30

[JWMster]

Silver: Yep. WIll do. What the heck... it can only teach me not to dawdle.

 

[MattKing]

All films suffer latent image degradation if you don't develop them promptly.
In most cases, the effect is manageable, and sufficiently slow as to not ruin most photos.
Pan-F is different - the latent images do degrade noticeably in relatively shorter periods of time - Ilford even warns about this.
The degradation is almost never totally complete though - don't delay developing any further.
Just don't rely on the edge numbering!

 

[TheTrailTog]

I would use the Ilfosol 3. 1 inversion each minute. 7 minutes 1:9 @ 20C.

This is tagged here: Dead Link Removed

Is that at box speed?

 

[Colin Corneau]

CES1um: Not my problem per se... though I have a roll from June. When I read that the latent image is gone after 30 days, I said, "Why bother?" and so I haven't even tried developing it. I should. Seems to be a common complaint. So I assume it is real.

With respect, you read wrong. Thirty day?!?!? That's ridiculous to even say.

I've just finished reading about Ferrania in a great book called "The Revenge Of Analog" and its chapter on film photography. It's a fascinating and very well researched book, I recommend it to anyone for a very entertaining read. The work that Film Ferrania did was pretty incredible.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Is that at box speed?

Yes, 80ASA

 

[sepiareverb]

Wondering about how these developing times are tailored, for scanning film or for wet printing? I only wet print. My films are here and the first roll is about finished. Will be mixing up D96 today. The ilfosol S I used last time (I got two rolls from someone on FB) gave me negatives I needed to print at grade -0.25 to 0.5, and that with marginal shadow detail. I bracketed most everything when shooting, and 80 seemed pretty hopeful for getting shadow detail, but even at 80 highlights were very dense.

Was going to give ID3 a try as well, something very compensating seems like a better fit from what I’ve gotten thus far.

 

[twelvetone12]

I did a roll @ EI80 in D76 and printed very well on grade 3

 

[JWMster]

Folks: Appreciate everyone's thoughts on Pan-F but seriously that was an aside. "My bad." Okay? Please: Let's push back to keep the focus on Ferrania's P30. Thanks!

 

[Scott Micciche]

I did a roll @ EI80 in D76 and printed very well on grade 3

I have done the same using the Ilfosol 3 (split grade print), HC-110(b) (grade 2) as well as D-96 (grade 2).

I used a Leitz Focomat V35.

I have also scanned as flat as possible to avoid the images looking too contrasty here on the web.


I can gladly post some cell phone images of the prints.

 

[RattyMouse]

Well I developed my first roll of Ferrania's P30 Alpha film. It didn't go well. Does this film have the ability to attract massive amounts of dust or does it come that way out of the box? I've never seen film look like this before. The film seems very underexposed too but I can live with that. The dust makes these images useless. I emphasize that I've never once see any film I've process come out looking like this before.

Canon 1V, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L II lens, Kodak HC-110, Dilution B, 5 mins @ 20C, 30 seconds of inversion, then 1 every minute.

This is a typical frame.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Well I developed my first roll of Ferrania's P30 Alpha film. It didn't go well. Does this film have the ability to attract massive amounts of dust or does it come that way out of the box? I've never seen film look like this before. The film seems very underexposed too but I can live with that. The dust makes these images useless. I emphasize that I've never once see any film I've process come out looking like this before.

Canon 1V, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L II lens, Kodak HC-110, Dilution B, 5 mins @ 20C, 30 seconds of inversion, then 1 every minute.

This is a typical frame.

What scanner and/or software are you using? Those spots look like photo flo. I've not had that much dust, but I do dry my negatives in a drying cabinet.

 

[RattyMouse]

What scanner and/or software are you using? Those spots look like photo flo. I've not had that much dust, but I do dry my negatives in a drying cabinet.

I'm using a Plustek OpticFilm 120 with SilverFast software. I dried these negatives like I have for years.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I'm using a Plustek OpticFilm 120 with SilverFast software. I dried these negatives like I have for years.

With the silverfast, try these settings:

Section: Negafix
Vendor: Other
Film Type: Other
ISO/ASA: Monochrome

Disable all the auto-contrast adjustments.


That is a lot of dust and looks like some water marks of some type.

 

[RattyMouse]

With the silverfast, try these settings:

Section: Negafix
Vendor: Other
Film Type: Other
ISO/ASA: Monochrome

Disable all the auto-contrast adjustments.


That is a lot of dust and looks like some water marks of some type.

Can you explain why you think these settings will help? I'm not understanding this. Thanks.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Can you explain why you think these settings will help? I'm not understanding this. Thanks.

I've noticed, and this isn't just with silverfast, that many scanning software suites use a very sharp tone curve, making the output too contrasty.

These settings disable the tone curve and I find is a good starting point to moving to photoshop, where you can apply more of a grade 1, 2, 3, etc. tone curve to your liking.

I personally only scan to raw and use colorperfect's colorneg for monochrome as I find it gives me a very good look compared to a wet print, so I cheat and set my enlarger to the virtual grade I choose using colorperfect as my starting point, then make some test strips.

Either way, I've not seen a scanning suite to not use some type of tone curve. Even Vuescan, as excellent as it is, applies something. The output of vuescan can be tamed greatly to produce a nice, flat, full-scale scan. For that software, I usually choose the Kodak as B/W vendor, TMAX-100 as the B/W brand and the type TMAX with a contrast index of .40.

Another factor is to output as a 16 bit tiff.

 

[RattyMouse]

I've noticed, and this isn't just with silverfast, that many scanning software suites use a very sharp tone curve, making the output too contrasty.

These settings disable the tone curve and I find is a good starting point to moving to photoshop, where you can apply more of a grade 1, 2, 3, etc. tone curve to your liking.

I personally only scan to raw and use colorperfect's colorneg for monochrome as I find it gives me a very good look compared to a wet print, so I cheat and set my enlarger to the virtual grade I choose using colorperfect as my starting point, then make some test strips.

Either way, I've not seen a scanning suite to not use some type of tone curve. Even Vuescan, as excellent as it is, applies something. The output of vuescan can be tamed greatly to produce a nice, flat, full-scale scan. For that software, I usually choose the Kodak as B/W vendor, TMAX-100 as the B/W brand and the type TMAX with a contrast index of .40.

Another factor is to output as a 16 bit tiff.

Thank you. My concern is with the massive amount of dust on the film. I've had dusty negatives from time to time, but never entire rolls ruined beyond use. The darkness of the images is a distinctly secondary concern.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Thank you. My concern is with the massive amount of dust on the film. I've had dusty negatives from time to time, but never entire rolls ruined beyond use. The darkness of the images is a distinctly secondary concern.

Yes, I completely agree. I am using a Pakon F135 to scan, and after drying for a day, I lightly clean the entire roll before feeding with one of Ilford's anti-static wipes, so that could also by why I don't see much dust. I don't know much about the plustek to know if it attracts dust like a flatbed does. With the Pakon, there are no dust surfaces aside from the 2 film sides.

 

[Ces1um]

Well I developed my first roll of Ferrania's P30 Alpha film. It didn't go well. Does this film have the ability to attract massive amounts of dust or does it come that way out of the box? I've never seen film look like this before. The dust makes these images useless.
This is a typical frame.

None of my P30 has suffered from any additional dust than any other black and white film I've used. Not sure why it's occurring for you, but I would look elsewhere for a culprit.

 

[RattyMouse]

Yes, I completely agree. I am using a Pakon F135 to scan, and after drying for a day, I lightly clean the entire roll before feeding with one of Ilford's anti-static wipes, so that could also by why I don't see much dust. I don't know much about the plustek to know if it attracts dust like a flatbed does. With the Pakon, there are no dust surfaces aside from the 2 film sides.

The Plustek is a fully enclosed scanner. I've scanned hundreds of rolls without issue. The day before I scanned this P30 roll, I developed and scanned two rolls of TMAX400. They came out just fine.

 

[Ces1um]

The Plustek is a fully enclosed scanner. I've scanned hundreds of rolls without issue. The day before I scanned this P30 roll, I developed and scanned two rolls of TMAX400. They came out just fine.

Any large changes in the humidity between the day you developed your tax and the day you developed your p30? Any large temperature shifts between the day?

 

[RattyMouse]

Any large changes in the humidity between the day you developed your tax and the day you developed your p30? Any large temperature shifts between the day?

Nope. Pretty cold here in Michigan and very dry as well. I've got 9 more rolls of P30 so maybe the next one will be better. I dont think rating it at ISO80 is correct. Maybe 50 next time.

 

[Ces1um]

Nope. Pretty cold here in Michigan and very dry as well. I've got 9 more rolls of P30 so maybe the next one will be better. I dont think rating it at ISO80 is correct. Maybe 50 next time.

Well, I could understand the dust if there were big differences in the weather between the tmax day and the p30 day. Colder temps drive down the humidity, indoor heating drives down humidity (unless you have a drum humidifier). Lower humidity means higher static electricity and more dust on your negatives- but if both days were roughly the same, then I dunno.
I think a lot of people agree with you about the iso rating. I haven't really experienced that, but I have a pretty unique way of developing my film that P30 seems to love and tri-x seems to truly hate.
Good luck figuring this out!

 

[RattyMouse]

Well, I could understand the dust if there were big differences in the weather between the tmax day and the p30 day. Colder temps drive down the humidity, indoor heating drives down humidity (unless you have a drum humidifier). Lower humidity means higher static electricity and more dust on your negatives- but if both days were roughly the same, then I dunno.
I think a lot of people agree with you about the iso rating. I haven't really experienced that, but I have a pretty unique way of developing my film that P30 seems to love and tri-x seems to truly hate.
Good luck figuring this out!

Thanks for your help.

 

[Ces1um]

Thanks for your help.

Have you tried using a Milty Zerostat? I have one for my records but often use it on my negatives. After a couple of shots with it dust easily blows off or can be knocked loose without much effort. They aren't cheap though- about $100 cdn.

 

[RattyMouse]

Have you tried using a Milty Zerostat? I have one for my records but often use it on my negatives. After a couple of shots with it dust easily blows off or can be knocked loose without much effort. They aren't cheap though- about $100 cdn.

Never heard of that before so no. Dust is not usually a big problem for me.