Film Ferrania p30

[Old-N-Feeble]

I wouldn't have used an entire roll during any basic (initial) exposure/development testing. I would have shot 1/3 roll with bracketed exposures and developed as recommended. Then I would do the same with another 1/3 roll but adjust development, and again with the remaining third. By then, I would be pretty close. After that, it's just tweaking for developer dilution and contrast management.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I get they are "best practices", but there should also be a minimum of proofreading and verification of the data. How can the 8 minute vs 7 minute be? I did 7 minutes in d76 (ei 80) and I got underexposed underdeveloped thin negatives. And it is not the developer, because HP5 developed the same day with the same batch of developer yields very good results. So I switched developer. At the end I ended up wasting 6 films for testing and only 2 with usable images.
Sincerely I don't think that asking for some real, tested development times is too much. I would do it myself if I had the equipment. But now I'm down to my last roll of P30, so I guess the party is over.

Equipment, metering technique, human error are all factors in differences. It is a community-provided datasheet.

 

[jonasfj]

I assume that Ferrania evaluated the ISO by the ANSI standard.

Simplified, a step wedge is exposed and the film is developed, in a developer very similar to D-76, to a certain contrast (slope of the characteristic curve). The ISO is then determined by evaluating the curve close to the toe:

https://www.kodak.com/uploadedfiles...en_motion_education_sensitometry_workbook.pdf

Thus, developing according to the standard gives every film a contrast withing a certain tolerance.

The contrast specified by the standard aims at fitting a scene consisting of 10 stops of light on the useful part of the characteristic curve. By useful, I mean on a part of the curve with enough slope to show detail and that can be absorbed by a photographic paper.

This must be the starting point for any comparison of developers or for modifying the curve to accompany a scene with more or less than 10 stops of light.

The good news is that you do not need any advanced sensiometric analyzers to do this. You simply need stuff you already have: a camera, an 18% gray card, a couple of films and means to develop the film and possibly (but not necessary) make prints:

http://www.halfhill.com/speed1.html

 

[faberryman]

I assume that Ferrania evaluated the ISO by the ANSI standard.

Nope. Ferrania didn't do any testing. They just made it according to the old formula and sent it out to the photographic community at large, and have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.

 

[jonasfj]

Nope. Ferrania didn't do any testing. They just made it according to the old formula and sent it out to the photographic community at large, and have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.

That surprises me, because it is neither difficult nor expensive to do for film manufacturer and it is not really serious to not provide such basic information about your product...

 

[Scott Micciche]

Nope. Ferrania didn't do any testing. They just made it according to the old formula and sent it out to the photographic community at large, and have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.

To call the work, risk and money spent anecdotal is completely asinine. I suggest a higher intake of fiber for you, Sir.

 

[faberryman]

To call the work, risk and money spent anecdotal is completely asinine. I suggest a higher intake of fiber for you, Sir.

Ferrania did a lot of things, but ISO testing of P30 wasn't one of them. They are relying on the photographic community to determine best practices for speed and processing.

 

[twelvetone12]

Yes I get the contributions etc, but is it so irrational to ask the manufacturer to produce some reliable starting points for development?

 

[faberryman]

Yes I get the contributions etc, but is it so irrational to ask the manufacturer to produce some reliable starting points for development?

P30 is a cine film made to be developed in D96. Since D96 is not available at retail (you have to source the chemicals and make it up yourself), most people will be using other developers. Since Film Ferrania is working on a shoestring and doesn't have the resources to test a variety of developers, it ceded testing to the photographic community at large.

 

[jonasfj]

To call the work, risk and money spent anecdotal is completely asinine. I suggest a higher intake of fiber for you, Sir.

feberryman did not say anything about the work, risk and money spent. He wrote: "... have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.". Unless the data is peer reviewed or tests have been performed by a certified lab, it is correct to be using the term anecdotal. I suggest you at least read right before you go on calling people stupid.

 

[pbromaghin]

The word is ALPHA.

 

[Scott Micciche]

feberryman did not say anything about the work, risk and money spent. He wrote: "... have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.". Unless the data is peer reviewed or tests have been performed by a certified lab, it is correct to be using the term anecdotal. I suggest you at least read right before you go on calling people stupid.

Well I never called anyone stupid, so maybe take up a reading course yourself as I called him constipated. Hopefully, there is a difference.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

IMHO, at least some very basic evaluation would have been prudent. Even I, as an individual person, would have had more accurate data than they offered.

That stated, I'm happy and thankful they're producing what seems to be a very high quality film. So, I'm certainly not complaining. I'm just a bit confused regarding the lackadaisical approach to basic information for usage.

 

[jonasfj]

Well I never called anyone stupid, so maybe take up a reading course yourself as I called him constipated. Hopefully, there is a difference.

I can read! You called someone asinine, which according to the dictionary means extremely stupid or foolish. Constipated means slow-moving, restricted or inhibited in some way. Do you not know what you are writing. The point is that he was 100% right.

 

[Scott Micciche]

I can read! You called someone asinine, which according to the dictionary means extremely stupid or foolish.

No, I called his insinuation that the work was anecdotal asinine, not the man. Reading more carefully and understanding sentence structure is important.

 

[jonasfj]

No, I called his insinuation that the work was anecdotal asinine, not the man. Reading more carefully and understanding sentence structure is important.

He did not insinuate anything. He said "... have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.", which is 100% correct.

BTW, there is no substantial difference between lying about what someone say and call it stupid and calling someone stupid.

 

[Scott Micciche]

He did not insinuate anything. He said "... have been collecting and publishing anecdotal information about its speed and processing.", which is 100% correct.

BTW, there is no substantial difference between lying about what someone say and call it stupid and calling someone stupid.

Well then, his statement was asinine, which it was (and still is). No person was called: "asinine".

I'm done with you, read what you like and assume what you want.

Back to the basis of the thread ...

 

[jonasfj]

P30 is a cine film made to be developed in D96. Since D96 is not available at retail (you have to source the chemicals and make it up yourself), most people will be using other developers. Since Film Ferrania is working on a shoestring and doesn't have the resources to test a variety of developers, it ceded testing to the photographic community at large.

The ISO is determined by developing in a developer that is "very similar" to D-76.

 

[jonasfj]

Well then, his statement was asinine, which it was (and still is). No person was called: "asinine".

I'm done with you, read what you like and assume what you want.

Back to the basis of the thread ...

Ok, fair enough. My point is that it is quite easy and cheap to establish the ISO. It should not be up for debate. It should simply be provided by the supplier. It would cost them probably less then $1000 to do the right thing.

 

[film_man]

It would cost them probably less then $1000 to do the right thing.

The problem is that they are probably down to whatever they can find at the back of the proverbial sofa. In hindsight (what a wonderful thing) the whole endeavour has been very amateurish and slap-dash from the start which is why they are where they are but...well at least they're trying.

 

[lantau]

Thanks for posting this information Iantau. I’ve used Neofin Blue on and off for years, and I too have some at hand. Thanks for the time for P30. How about scanning the entire list of films/times/temps and posting it here?

Got to admit that IIRC I’ve always used screw-top bottled Neofin; the glass ampoule is earlier packaging, and very cool too!

Sorry, I lost your reply a little while. I went for a holiday shortly after your posting. I scanned the table, the English instructions and the dilution table from the infosheet. If anyone thinks it is a better idea to post this somewhere else on this site then let me know.

 

[JWMster]

Wonder whether anyone's tried Bergger's Berspeed? On recommendation from Catlabs, I've picked up some Berspeed to use with my Jobo. I've very much been an Ilford ID-11 man, but this is supposed to top that according to CLabs folks, so seems worth a shot. But I'll have to wait for P30 to come out in 120 or MF to give me a break... so I can process the 35mm P40 I've shot. Been busy 'round these parts!!!

 

[Scott Micciche]

Ferrania P30 Alpha box speed, developed in Adox Silvermax, 1:29 11 minutes 20C 1 minute continuous, 1 inversion/30s thereafter.

Cataloged in lightroom, no adjustments.

Pakon F135 scans to raw, inverted in colorperfect.

Please see the flickr link for more photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/thekurgan/albums/72157692998955080

Thanks for taking a look.

 

[EASmithV]

I absolutely loved the P80 rolls I got. I found it to be accurate to box speed in a 1:100 rodinal stand.
It looks gorgeous on reflective objects... Vintage cars, metal objects, etc. But especially so in subdued / diffuse light.
Not unlike Pan F+.

I haven't gotten around to printing it wet (but i'm very much looking forward to) so keep that in mind.

 

[Trask]

Sorry, I lost your reply a little while. I went for a holiday shortly after your posting. I scanned the table, the English instructions and the dilution table from the infosheet. If anyone thinks it is a better idea to post this somewhere else on this site then let me know.

Thanks for posting that info.