Fuji Neopan 400 and Perceptol - Dev Times Differences

I have checked both the Ilford and Massive Dev Chart times expecting a great deal of agreement on times - there usually is - but discovered considerable differences here: Times were as follows:

Ilford: Stock 1:1 1:3 MDC: Stock 1:1 1:3
10 14 20 14 18 23
It's an increase of 4 mins for MDC for stock and 1:1 and 3 mins for 1:3 compared to Ilford. So there's a kind of consistency here but of course the percentage differences are 40%, 28% and 15% respectively. So there is much more agreement at the higher dilutions. I suppose that the safest route is to go for the higher dilutions where I have found that a couple of mins greater than the Ilford times to have been about right.

I have done a search and I couldn't find any threads on this combo so maybe no-one has used it but on the off chance that anyone has or can offer advice on which times to follow, I thought I'd post this thread.

I'd like to give it a try as I tried D400 at box speed and 1:3 in Perceptol and liked the outcome and thought that Neopan 400 with Perceptol is worth a shot.

Thanks

pentaxuser

Yeah, I've noted those time shifts as well. I've found with Neopan 400 my preference is for the Ilford numbers, using agitation cycle of once a minute, whereas the Kodak numbers from the MDC are better for agitation cycle of once every 30 sec. I've found the highlights stay closer in check when I taper off the agitation the last 10 min when doing the 1:3 dilution, say once every 2-3 min.

RidingWaves. Thanks for prompt reply and for being able to follow the figures. I hadn't realised that the time figures wouldn't be placed directly under each dilution. They were when typing out the thread. So for those having difficulty it should read: Ilford: Stock 10 mins; 1:1 14 mins; 1:3 20 mins

MDC: Stock 14 mins; 1:1 18 mins; 1:3 23 mins

When you say once a minute, do you mean one inversion per minute or one Ilford inversion cycle per minute which is about 4-5 inversions over 10 secs?

I note that the MDC numbers are based on continuous agitation for 30 secs and then 3 inversions over 10 secs per minute. The Ilford pattern is 10 secs agitation per minute, say 3-5 inversions per minute. So very little difference except MDC gives more at start which combined with longer times should result in contrastier negs.

What do you mean by the Kodak numbers?

If it is one inversion per minute or one per 30 secs this is considerably less inversions than Ilford recommend. Over a 23 minute cycle Ilford agitation would involve about 4/5 inversions x 23 minutes = 92/115 inversions compared to 1 x 23 = 23 inversions or even less if the interval in the last 10 mins becomes 1 per 2 mins.

I take it that you are talking about Perceptol? Can you clarify on this and the inversion numbers you use?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Actually I now seldom use the MDC #'s, hard to tell where some times are from. RE: Neopan, with either Perceptol or Microdol-X, at higher dilutions and higher temps I use the Ilford numbers from Ilford Perecptol, and do the usual full agitation first min then anywhere from 3-8 inversions per minute, and as I stated above, taper off the agitations at the end.
Kodak films by my impression seem to respond well to slightly more frequent agitations, while Fuji's films seem to repond as well to lighter agitations further spaced. Ilfords seem to be in the middle, respond well to both techniques depending on what type of final 'look' your aiming for.

Thanks RidingWaves. I agree that any large deviations from Dev manufacturers' times can be suspect - especially if it's their own film that's being developed. That's why i was a little concerned about the increase in time in the MDC. In this case it's not Ilford film but I'll go with Ilford times and add 10%. I have found that about 10% more time seems to give better negs. I'll go with Ilford agitation but make it constant for first 30 secs instead of just 10 secs then about 4-5 inversions per minute which is close to yours.

Interesting point about the frequency of agitations for the 3 makes. I normally stick to Ilford film in B&W but occasionally use Fuji although not with Perceptol but haven't bothered with Kodak to date.

Might give the new T-Max a go once see some reports on it.

pentaxuser

It's been my vast experience with Neopan 400 that it needs a good solid minute of first agitation, it can be light and random but I've found that this film is a 'slow starter', then can gain density rapidly as development progresses, which is why I taper off the agitations with MDX 1:3, keeps a nice full density without blasting the highlights as to be unprintable.

Particularly with Xtol, the first minute is critical to ensure smooth skies and reduce or elminate the possiblity of processing marks. You don't have to worry about grain, which seems to come more into play with at the end of overdevelopment. Just think of a Japanese Tea Ceremony, and start strong then finish up gentle, a wonderful film that really reponds well.

As well I am looking forward to trying the new Tmax 400.

Thanks. I'll definitely try the 1 min agitation with the next Fuji Neopan 400 as it sounds as if its characteristics differ from Ilford. Nice that you can tap into the kind of experience on APUG that you could never accumulate by yourself.

pentaxuser