Film Ferrania p30

[Ces1um]

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

I'm always fighting it- but I have teenagers and they're filthy animals.

 

[sepiareverb]

So I guess everyone is scanning this stuff.

 

[RattyMouse]

So I guess everyone is scanning this stuff.

Well, if you want to show it here, you pretty much have to.

 

[Ces1um]

So I guess everyone is scanning this stuff.

You're right though, I haven't seen a single thread on how well it prints (but I haven't conciously looked for one).

 

[twelvetone12]

There are various reports from me and Scott on this thread that it prints very easily (I too use a Focomat v35, btw)

 

[Scott Micciche]

You're right though, I haven't seen a single thread on how well it prints (but I haven't conciously looked for one).

Sorry crummy cell phone pics with no flash

Duck = P30 ASA80 - HC-110 30s initial, 1 inversion / minute 5 min total @20C, Nikon F2, 105mm f/2.5
Love Locks = P30 ASA80 - Ilfosol 3 30s initial, 1 inversion / minute 7 minutes total @ 20C, Nikon F6, 50mm f/1.2

 

[sepiareverb]

I’ve found the ilfosol3 negs to be lacking in shadow detail and to have some stubbornly blocked up highlights on an LPL45 VC enlarger. Hoping the D96 or ID3 to mitigate this. I never scan film, I only scan from 8x10 prints.

 

[AgX]

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.

Dust on the film brought with it from the factory and not wiped off at the cassette or dust attracted inside the camera would show up black.

 

[RattyMouse]

Dust on the film brought with it from the factory and not wiped off at the cassette or dust attracted inside the camera would show up black.

Thank you.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I’ve found the ilfosol3 negs to be lacking in shadow detail and to have some stubbornly blocked up highlights on an LPL45 VC enlarger. Hoping the D96 or ID3 to mitigate this. I never scan film, I only scan from 8x10 prints.

I found the same in many contrasty situations, but in soft light, the ilfosol was on par with HC-110(b).

TMAX Developer was the primo developer for nice, flat images.

The Rodinal semi-stand was also truly amazing for its ability to compensate, yet give nice speed.

 

[Hood]

I have been reading this entire thread for a few days now. Some fantastic test images shown. Really interesting to see everyone results with different developers, times, etc.
I am keen to swap my kickstarter reward from the colour slide film to this P30 in the next round they allow us to do so I think, especially for some 120 once it's available.
I was thinking while reading all the comments, that it's a shame they have not made some bulk rolls (30.5m or even 17m) of the 135 available to some people so they can carry out lots of testing with developers etc. easily by just rolling some small test rolls for themselves.

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.

I know this is probably a silly reply, but how old is your fixer and do you typically filter it after use? (through a coffee filter or the like)
I often get excess dust and marks like this when I've been lazy and kept using the same fixer for too long and not filtered properly thus it containing lots of particles. Just a thought.

 

[sepiareverb]

Just ran two rolls in D96. Shot both at ISO80, after reading that Ferrania is adamant that this is an 80 speed film. Looked at the best practices sheet and read that for D96, the best chemistry for P30, one should shoot it at 50. Ah well. I bracketed anyway.

I use metal reels and tanks. For these rolls I used a single 300mL tank for each.

First roll was 9 minutes, gave 15 seconds of agaitation initially then 1 inversion every ten seconds. Film looked much better than the Ilfosol3 roll, but still pretty contrasty.

Second roll was 11 minutes, gave 15 seconds of agitation initially then 1 inversion every minute. This roll looks very good. I will give this another try with some more film.

Films are in the dryer now, I will get to print some tomorrow and will give some impressions of the negatives in the enlarger and on paper.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Just ran two rolls in D96. Shot both at ISO80, after reading that Ferrania is adamant that this is an 80 speed film. Looked at the best practices sheet and read that for D96, the best chemistry for P30, one should shoot it at 50. Ah well. I bracketed anyway.

I use metal reels and tanks. For these rolls I used a single 300mL tank for each.

First roll was 9 minutes, gave 15 seconds of agaitation initially then 1 inversion every ten seconds. Film looked much better than the Ilfosol3 roll, but still pretty contrasty.

Second roll was 11 minutes, gave 15 seconds of agitation initially then 1 inversion every minute. This roll looks very good. I will give this another try with some more film.

Films are in the dryer now, I will get to print some tomorrow and will give some impressions of the negatives in the enlarger and on paper.

It is actually misleading. The sheet doesn't say 50ASA is the best practice, it's just that 80ASA wasn't tested outside of the lab so it wasn't on the chart for 80ASA. It will be included on the chart: 80ASA - 20C - 8 minutes continuous agitation.

D-96 works best using constant agitation, it's pH target is 8.5-8.6.

 

[RattyMouse]

I have been reading this entire thread for a few days now. Some fantastic test images shown. Really interesting to see everyone results with different developers, times, etc.
I am keen to swap my kickstarter reward from the colour slide film to this P30 in the next round they allow us to do so I think, especially for some 120 once it's available.
I was thinking while reading all the comments, that it's a shame they have not made some bulk rolls (30.5m or even 17m) of the 135 available to some people so they can carry out lots of testing with developers etc. easily by just rolling some small test rolls for themselves.



I know this is probably a silly reply, but how old is your fixer and do you typically filter it after use? (through a coffee filter or the like)
I often get excess dust and marks like this when I've been lazy and kept using the same fixer for too long and not filtered properly thus it containing lots of particles. Just a thought.

My fixer is pretty old, but produced excellent results the day before when I processed a roll of TMAX400.

I wash my film pretty extensively after fixing and I would think that any particles that the fixer leaves behind would be removed by the extensive washing (with agitation) that i do.

 

[sepiareverb]

...D-96 works best using constant agitation, it's pH target is 8.5-8.6.

I can’t test for pH here, mixed like I mix everything else, with tap water. The longer time with less agitation made negatives that look much closer to what I get with UN54, which print grade 2 to 3 with the LPL VC Head on Ilford Multigrade Classic in Sprint Quicksilver, Moersch ECO 4812 or Compard Print NE. I will experiment a little more once I get some more info from printing and shooting more film in a wider range of light.

I didn’t see anything like dirt or dust on the films when I just cut and sleeved them.

 

[Alan9940]

Like Bob, I can't test for pH either, but I mixed up the D-96 with distilled water like I do with all developers. However, I processed the film for 6 mins (about 25% less than the recommend 8 mins) on my Jobo and the negs came out way over-developed; like 2.12 Zone VIII density. I'm going to try slow inversion agitation in a Paterson System 4 tank next. If anybody has any tips to pass along, I'm listening...

 

[Scott Micciche]

Like Bob, I can't test for pH either, but I mixed up the D-96 with distilled water like I do with all developers. However, I processed the film for 6 mins (about 25% less than the recommend 8 mins) on my Jobo and the negs came out way over-developed; like 2.12 Zone VIII density. I'm going to try slow inversion agitation in a Paterson System 4 tank next. If anybody has any tips to pass along, I'm listening...

My agitation scheme for constant was like Fred Picker: pick up left hand, invert, put down, pick up with right hand, invert, put down and so on for 8 minutes total. No shaking like a bartender I can feel the fluid flow in the tank. I've never used a Jobo, so maybe that motion causes some overdevelopment. I used 8 minutes in my Rondinax as well, but it's agitation/twisting is like a quick rapid spin of the wheel, wait 1-2 seconds and repeat. I prefer the Jobo 1520 tank used like a Patterson.

I also have done nothing but use colorperfect inversion so no contrast or tone curves. They looked natural to me.

 

[Alan9940]

My agitation scheme for constant was like Fred Picker: pick up left hand, invert, put down, pick up with right hand, invert, put down and so on for 8 minutes total. No shaking like a bartender I can feel the fluid flow in the tank. I've never used a Jobo, so maybe that motion causes some overdevelopment. I used 8 minutes in my Rondinax as well, but it's agitation/twisting is like a quick rapid spin of the wheel, wait 1-2 seconds and repeat. I prefer the Jobo 1520 tank used like a Patterson.

I also have done nothing but use colorperfect inversion so no contrast or tone curves. They looked natural to me.

Yeah, my normal tank agitation is very much like yours, although I add a twisting motion as the tank is inverted. I'll try your method first. I have a Jobo 15xx series tank, but all my Jobo tanks have cog wheels for the lift. I'll use the Paterson and report back.

 

[Scott Micciche]

Yeah, my normal tank agitation is very much like yours, although I add a twisting motion as the tank is inverted. I'll try your method first. I have a Jobo 15xx series tank, but all my Jobo tanks have cog wheels for the lift. I'll use the Paterson and report back.

I added a negative strip above a light table and some scanned images. I don't know how much it will help since it's all digital here, but these are what the negs looked like from the D-96 8 minutes.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I shoot very, very little 35mm format and when this film in 120 hits the market I'll be jumping on it. It has a "look" that appeals to me and can't wait to try it out. Maybe I should order some just for an excuse to haul the Contax out and dust it off. JohnW

 

[RattyMouse]

I shoot very, very little 35mm format and when this film in 120 hits the market I'll be jumping on it. It has a "look" that appeals to me and can't wait to try it out. Maybe I should order some just for an excuse to haul the Contax out and dust it off. JohnW

I'd never have a Contax camera that didnt see use. Beautiful cameras and even better lenses.

 

[faberryman]

I shoot very, very little 35mm format and when this film in 120 hits the market I'll be jumping on it. It has a "look" that appeals to me and can't wait to try it out. Maybe I should order some just for an excuse to haul the Contax out and dust it off. JohnW

I am not sure which of the looks of this film which has been developed in various developers according to various regimes and scanned on various scanners appeals to you, but I hope you are able to replicate it.

 

[warden]

Hi all,

I experimented with a roll of P30 today and had a good time. In general I found the film to be pretty sensitive to proper exposure, more so than other black and white films I use. I used my camera's meter to expose at iso80 and developed with Ilfosol3 closely following the best practices document on the Ferrania web site. My once-a-minute inversions were of the gentle kind, not shaking hard. I have three rolls so I'll try again with Ilfosol3 because that's what I have on hand. (I used a light yellow filter for what it's worth.)

In general I think the film will do better with more light and less developing, so I'll expose at iso50 and slower, and shorten the development time. This roll had little shadow detail and also blown highlights, and when the scene had generally even lighting the negatives were pretty thin.

I'll share if my approach improves things. This is an interesting film with fine grain and I wish Ferrania all success with it.

 

[JWMster]

At the risk of going modestly off topic because I'm using XTOL-R these days, I'm converting the FAQ's XTOL 1:3 formula to XTOL-R as probably running somewhere between 54.5% and 59.25% averages I'm seeing for other films where STOCK, 1:1 and 1:3 dilutions are given - looking at Perceptol and XTOL as my two favorites. On this basis, looks to me like my time ought to run somewhere between 9:16 and 10:04 for "N". And that's if the Massive Development Chart has any bearing on this film at all. Look forward to giving it a try. Should be fun.

PS: If you think my math is off here, please feel free to let me know as I'm still relatively new to this. THanks! Note that Kodak's J-109 pretty much don't seem to vary at boxspeed from 1:1 though with Push and Pull they seem to add 30 seconds. So I'm not making any initial adjustment on that basis.

 

[sepiareverb]

Well, not very happy with the results on paper. Wet printed from the D96 negs, stuff shot at ISO 80 and 50, run with reduced agitation in an attempt to minimize highlights blocking up and hold shadow detail. Still needed to print on grade 1 or 0, and not terribly good tonality. I suppose this is just not a film I'm going to bother with.