Film Ferrania p30

[warden]

Just closing the loop with a wet print. This was a straight print of a negative exposed at ISO50. On 8x10 paper it was a 20 second exposure at f5.6 with a 1.5 contrast filter on Ilford MG RC paper. I didn't dodge or burn, just looking for contrast on the paper.

The grain under the magnifier is really fine.

 

[twelvetone12]

ISO or ASA, it does not matter. ISO took over the ASA standard, and it is a standard anyway.

And what matters is what is stated on the box, not what Dave Bias says.

This is a new one. Since he is the spokesperson for Ferrania I assumed he knew his stuff, I guess then that he is lying then.

 

[AgX]

Nothing new.
If you buy a box of film and get no other information with it, then the box printing is what you have to rely too.

If a spokesman says something different somewhere else then the whole enterprise is questionable.


A preproduction test-film would be something diffferent. The whole procedure would be different.

 

[twelvetone12]

But... isn't this a preproduction test-film? They even label it as "alpha"! In the meantime, I know I need not to use a red filter and once I understood how it responds to light, I'm very happy with this film.

 

[peter k.]

isn't this a preproduction test-film?

Yep... and like it also...as we are experimenting also, in our preproduction development..

twelvetone you stated that you developed it in D76 @ 80.. and liked the results.. Could you give some more info... Stock or 1:1 how long and agitation?
We tried @ box 1:1 at 13 min with continuous agitation, liked the results, then tried it @ 50 with D76 stock for 8 min with continuous agitation also, and did not like.
But that may have been a bad exposure. Going to try it again.
Doing test strips, and shooting them in a 2x3 speed, film holder, one at time, so may have gotten the exposure off. No way to compare it to other shots as that was the only one.. .

 

[MattKing]

I sincerely doubt that Ferrania has performed - on this alpha release - the sort of testing that would result in a reliable and certifiable ISO speed designation.
I am confident that the ASA designation on the box is intended to produce reasonably usable results for the early users, and informative feedback from those users.
Remember folks, Ferrania is a tiny operation, with some beautiful big and old machines, and some real passion.
And by the way, those who use a "base fog + .1" speed test are likely using methods that are closer to Zone System methods than ISO speed tests.

 

[AgX]

We got strong regulations on such designation here in the EU, such thus is not a joke.

As indicated there is a difference between selling an early sample, still lab made, and offering potential users a test-film.

 

[bernard_L]

I measure the center of the target and the 4 corners to ensure the light level is dead even. I can assure you that I have gotten exact brightnss levels for each of the 5 measuring points.

Uniformity within one sample was not my point, as should have been clear; rather the choice of a peculiar black surface. What if "Super Black" had been readily available and you had used that? Matte black poster paper has probably a reflection density not far from 1.8. Quoting from Wikipedia, Super Black "absorbs 99.9% of light."; that is a reflection density of 3.0. That is a 4 zone difference; not conducive to reasonably accurate speed point measurement. Leaving aside Super Black, which is not readily available, there are all the other possible "blacks" in-between.

Not to say that your method does not work; possibly you made a lucky choice.

 

[twelvetone12]

@peter k. I used d76 stock for 80 iso using the indications in the PDF. I can't access my notes right now for the time. When I get home I can too post a print from that negative.

 

[Alan9940]

Not to say that your method does not work; possibly you made a lucky choice.

OK. Well, guess I've been lucky for nearly 40 years, then.

 

[sepiareverb]

Only on a forum could there be a disagreement on what particular kind of black card is acceptable for someone else to use for their personal film testing. Well I guess it only came up because someone mentioned their method for doing something, which is not done the way some other person knows it must be done.

 

[Alan9940]

Only on a forum could there be a disagreement on what particular kind of black card is acceptable for someone else to use for their personal film testing. Well I guess it only came up because someone mentioned their method for doing something, which is not done the way some other person knows it must be done.

Thank you. I detailed my methods only to document what I had done testing this film. I am not going to get into a discussion about how black a black one needs to determine Zone 1 exposure! This all reminds me of something my photo mentor said, long ago, in regards to Ansel Adams. He said, "If I heard Ansel printed in a bikini and trout boots, I'd think it odd, but I'd try it!"

 

[trendland]

Another data point, and YMMV, and etc etc...

My first roll was unsuccessful at iso80 while using Ferrania's best practices with Ilfosol3. Too contrasty, with no shadows and blown highlights in normal light. I guessed it was under exposed and over developed.

This roll I bracketed at iso50 and iso25, and developed 6 minutes in Ilfosol3, (1 minute less than directed). All of the negatives were usable this time and looked good to me. I think I could wet print at either speed, and will try that next. But for me this will be an iso 32 film. And I like it.

View attachment 195212

I guess there is something wrong with your Ilforsol developer. Is it still a liquid concentrate? I did not use it since 1980.
But that has nothing to say - it is a standard developer type not soo bad.
Perhaps wrong delution ?
with regards

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Is is worth to mix d96 to develop this film? I tried one roll in d76 (at box speed) and results were *much* better than Rodinal at same speed, also the red response is... better! (I'm still curious why on this)

We are working with a few different people to offer bottled D-96. It will take a some weeks to work out all the details, so if you can mix up your own, feel free!!

The red response has to do with the pH of the developer and your water. I'm still trying to understand exactly what that means in real-world terms...

 

[FILM Ferrania]

It shouldn't be this difficult. Film Ferrania says this is an ISO 80 film. The ISO criteria are clear and if Ferrania has tested the film and found it to be ISO 80, that is the real speed of the film. It would be fairly easy to validate this. For those doing their own Zone System-style tests, an ISO 80 film should basically have a "personal EI" speed of 50.

As I said in another thread, our co-founder Marco Pagni takes ISO very very seriously. We have chosen the "80 ASA" designation instead because it was historically accurate and because Marco says we can't call it 80 ISO until he says so.

Several people have attempted to confirm the "actual" speed of the film through various methods.

I understand that some feel compelled to do this, but to be perfectly frank, 99% of our customers just shoot the film at 80 ISO and they seem to be loving the results.

The folks in the factory are certainly very concerned to dial-in our films to meet ISO standards - but we simply do not have the staff necessary to do this quite yet.

Considering that we quickly and easily sell every single roll we make, I am FAR more concerned that we make MORE of what we have been making - and that our customers love it.

Funny side note:
A friend of mine in Germany dropped her P30 at dm - a chain of drugstores that is the US equivalent of RiteAid or Walgreens.
The prints they gave her were terrible, but the negatives themselves were amazing.
And I can hardly think that they took the time to analyze the film or consult our Best Practices PDF. They just processed it like they process any 80 ISO B&W film.
I was truly stunned at the results, and quite excited that our German customers will have the option of dropping P30 at their corner drugstore!

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Dunan:

WOw! Have fun! Figuring on pent-up demand and not having made it into to kickstarter, I ordered only 5 rolls now in 35mm as I'm really looking forward to the 120... in April or thereabouts.
Given all the troubles of shooting and losing the latent images in Pan-F, I think it's a good bet this film offers a good option in lieu of Pan F. I look forward to shooting it, and seeing whether it might even step into the shoes of FP4. Can't wait to see how it soups in XTOL-R.

Great news I'd share more broadly is that the folks at Ferrania have been very careful with the shipping. They reached out to re-confirm my address which had somehow become garbled. Got it fixed, and its good to know these folks are careful as well as all the rest.

Again and again, my hats off to Ferrania for getting not just into production, but into general distribution. Thanks!

Thanks Skip - we are trying! And our US warehouse folks are pretty awesome about alerting me if anything is amiss.

 

[trendland]

As I said in another thread, our co-founder Marco Pagni takes ISO very very seriously. We have chosen the "80 ASA" designation instead because it was historically accurate and because Marco says we can't call it 80 ISO until he says so.

Several people have attempted to confirm the "actual" speed of the film through various methods.

I understand that some feel compelled to do this, but to be perfectly frank, 99% of our customers just shoot the film at 80 ISO and they seem to be loving the results.

The folks in the factory are certainly very concerned to dial-in our films to meet ISO standards - but we simply do not have the staff necessary to do this quite yet.

Considering that we quickly and easily sell every single roll we make, I am FAR more concerned that we make MORE of what we have been making - and that our customers love it.

Funny side note:
A friend of mine in Germany dropped her P30 at dm - a chain of drugstores that is the US equivalent of RiteAid or Walgreens.
The prints they gave her were terrible, but the negatives themselves were amazing.
And I can hardly think that they took the time to analyze the film or consult our Best Practices PDF. They just processed it like they process any 80 ISO B&W film.
I was truly stunned at the results, and quite excited that our German customers will have the option of dropping P30 at their corner drugstore!

If you might look back to film speed Film Ferrania you soon may remenber : there often was a little difference from box speed given as recomandation and real speed of films - explicide with color negative films. So many manufacturers rated a little lower box speed to their films than the films actually had. (1/3 stop). Because manufacturers did avoid underexposure from amateuric photographers with less characteristic on the negatives. A little overexposure didn't cause such less quality. Many ISO 100 color negative films had actually ISO 110 - ISO 135 (messured with exact methods). But sure this was no help to amateuric people with underexposures of 4,5 stops.......!
I realy can't see a problem of a film wich is rated as box speed ISO 80 and little difference from developement. As it would have actually indeed ISO 40 - 50 - I would find out soon and I personaly would correct the times of developement.
So we all may notice : THE recomanded time table from manufacturers is just a recomandation.Some like to state : a starting point.
Well - explicide your datas with different developers you gave let me not feel you did your work lousy ...?
It seams to be the different : Your datas you find for p30 looks like a serious recomandation from tested developers of a lot different types.
I can't say if everything is 100% correct because I did not have a first try.
...but I (personaly) would have my own workflow at lower E.I. as I do with most other bw films - so were is here the real problem of some? Perhaps an incorrect workflow from indivitual development (delution,temperature) or from exposure
(wrong messurement) or from shell life of developers ??? You all may beat me therefore - but sometimes it is more smart to look at the failure first to yourself (not allways - but sometimes)
with regards

PS : An actually box speed of ISO 32 with a rated ISO 80 film is totaly outside of normal production/manufacturing tollerances - I never heard about - I can't remember a single case.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

I've now caught up on this thread and I must say two things.

1. Thank you Scott Micciche for your diligent work in helping me to redefine our Best Practices document. Version 2.0 was posted yesterday for anyone who is interested. And thank you for "holding down the fort" in this thread.
2. The VAST majority of our customers just take the film out and shoot it. Most love it and want to buy more than we can physically produce. That is literally the only thing we care about at this point in time. We don't have the luxury to care about anything else.

 

[trendland]

As I said in another thread, our co-founder Marco Pagni takes ISO very very seriously. We have chosen the "80 ASA" designation instead because it was historically accurate and because Marco says we can't call it 80 ISO until he says so.

Several people have attempted to confirm the "actual" speed of the film through various methods.

I understand that some feel compelled to do this, but to be perfectly frank, 99% of our customers just shoot the film at 80 ISO and they seem to be loving the results.

The folks in the factory are certainly very concerned to dial-in our films to meet ISO standards - but we simply do not have the staff necessary to do this quite yet.

Considering that we quickly and easily sell every single roll we make, I am FAR more concerned that we make MORE of what we have been making - and that our customers love it.

Funny side note:
A friend of mine in Germany dropped her P30 at dm - a chain of drugstores that is the US equivalent of RiteAid or Walgreens.
The prints they gave her were terrible, but the negatives themselves were amazing.
And I can hardly think that they took the time to analyze the film or consult our Best Practices PDF. They just processed it like they process any 80 ISO B&W film.
I was truly stunned at the results, and quite excited that our German customers will have the option of dropping P30 at their corner drugstore!

Well - what we could learn from your friend ? If your intention is to get the cheapest prints from a bw film you soon should find your way to such kind of drugstore.
But the risc is always to have both : smallest costs/horrible print quality.
I indeed don't wonder about that the film negatives are not soo bad.
Because drogstores are disloziating the development to special labs.These labs are collecting a mass of films before starting development for the whole region/state. They can't affort to get bad development of 2700 films a single development run. But with prints they don't care so much.
with regards

 

[trendland]

It actually says ASA 80, and somewhere Dave Bias stated that they did not repeat (yet?) speed testing but accepted the legacy value. Curves and some more science would be appreciated, but again Dave stated it is not a priority so it will not be done (a shame, imho).

Continuing the anecdotal evidence, I works very well @ei 25 in rodinal, nice in d76 @80, and transparent frames when I used a red filter.

Thanks for stating. We will soon come back to ASA standard? By the way - one day an assistent asked me :"What is ASA" ?
He is also a good photographer - I can't beliefe - he has never heard about....
with regards

 

[warden]

I guess there is something wrong with your Ilforsol developer. Is it still a liquid concentrate? I did not use it since 1980.
But that has nothing to say - it is a standard developer type not soo bad.
Perhaps wrong delution ?
with regards

There was nothing wrong with my developer or the way it was prepared, I just needed to adjust the time in the developer to suit the film. I now see Ferrania has changed the best practices document for Ilfosol 3 and it matches my findings, down from 7 minutes to 6.

 

[Scott Micciche]

There was nothing wrong with my developer or the way it was prepared, I just needed to adjust the time in the developer to suit the film. I now see Ferrania has changed the best practices document for Ilfosol 3 and it matches my findings, down from 7 minutes to 6.

Six minutes seemed not only reliable, but pleasing once processed. It reminded me of Rollei Retro 80s with respect to the grays.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I've now caught up on this thread and I must say two things.

1. Thank you Scott Micciche for your diligent work in helping me to redefine our Best Practices document. Version 2.0 was posted yesterday for anyone who is interested. And thank you for "holding down the fort" in this thread.
2. The VAST majority of our customers just take the film out and shoot it. Most love it and want to buy more than we can physically produce. That is literally the only thing we care about at this point in time. We don't have the luxury to care about anything else.

It was my pleasure!

Auguri!

-- Scott

 

[warden]

Six minutes seemed not only reliable, but pleasing once processed. It reminded me of Rollei Retro 80s with respect to the grays.

The negatives do look good Scott, and they wet printed easily too. I like this film and will buy more when it's available.

 

[AgX]

As I said in another thread, our co-founder Marco Pagni takes ISO very very seriously. We have chosen the "80 ASA" designation instead because it was historically accurate and because Marco says we can't call it 80 ISO until he says so.

Both terms refer to a given standard. A film contained in a box with such designation has to qualify to this.
This is a legal matter, not a historic one.