Fuji Neopan Acros 100 @ 400 developed with Ilford HC?

[marciofs]

I haven't found a development time for this combination.
But I am looking for tips to try...
Any ideas?

 

[Xmas]

Easier to print if you use Delta400 or Tmax400.

 

[marciofs]

Easier to print if you use Delta400 or Tmax400.

Not that simple...

I am doing long exposures. If I use Delta 400 or Tmax 400 I would have to rate them at 3200. Which I do with Delta 3200. But I am trying to experiment with Fuji Neopan 100.

I prefer the look of Fuji Neopan acros 100 @ 400 but developed with Rodinal. Rodinal slow the speed a bit though.
And Fuji 100 is cheaper than Delta 3200.

It would be great if the Fuji Neopan 400 and 1600 weren't discontinued.

 

[markbarendt]

Try a roll developed normally (for 100).

 

[marciofs]

Maybe Stand development with Ilford HC?

 

[marciofs]

Try a roll developed normally (for 100).

Do you think it would not make much difference?

 

[Rick A]

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/NeopanAcros100.pdf

According to Fuji, Acros can be pushed one stop (200), but with a 50% increase in developing time using D-76 or T-Max developers.

 

[marciofs]

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/NeopanAcros100.pdf

According to Fuji, Acros can be pushed one stop (200), but with a 50% increase in developing time using D-76 or T-Max developers.

What??? They don't list Rodinal... :/

I would prefer keep using Rodinal stand development than buying a third developer bottle.

 

[Rick A]

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchar...cros&Developer=Rodinal&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C

 

[trythis]

If you have diafine its supposed to allow shooting many films at higher speeds. I know little abouy diafine but plan on testing this combo since I have diafine and acros 100.


Sent with typotalk

 

[markbarendt]

Do you think it would not make much difference?

As far as detail available on the film, little if any difference.

How are you printing, VC paper? Scan and Print? ...

 

[marciofs]

As far as detail available on the film, little if any difference.

How are you printing, VC paper? Scan and Print? ...

I didn't print any pinhole photo (long exposure portrait in studio) shot with Fuji acros 100 yet.

But I plan to print tomorrow the ones I developed with Rodinal. I will print with Fomatone (fibre paper).

 

[marciofs]

As far as detail available on the film, little if any difference.

How are you printing, VC paper? Scan and Print? ...

So it would be like developing Neopan 400? I was comparing this table:

Neopan 100 Acros Ilfotec HC 1+31 100 6 6 6 18C
Neopan 400 Ilfotec HC 1+31 400 6 6 20C

The difference is only the temperature. So it probably would be better if I develop with 20ºC. Right?



I was also looking at it:

Delta 100 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 100 6 6 6 20C
Delta 100 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 200 8 8 8 20C

Delta 3200 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 400 6 6 20C
Delta 3200 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 800 7.5 7.5 20C
Delta 3200 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 1600 9 9 20C
Delta 3200 Pro Ilfotec HC 1+31 3200 14.5 14.5 20C

And I though maybe if I add 2 minutes or 3 in the development time with Fuji Neopan acros 100 @ 400???

 

[markbarendt]

I will print with Fomatone (fibre paper).

Is that a variable contrast (VC) paper? Fixed grade?

 

[marciofs]

Is that a variable contrast (VC) paper? Fixed grade?

Sorry,
It is variable contrast paper. I use filters to work on contrast when printing.

 

[markbarendt]

And I though maybe if I add 2 minutes or 3 in the development time with Fuji Neopan acros 100 @ 400???

I'd start with the directions for Acros here http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2011427105392231.pdf No push.

Try printing those negatives at various paper grades as nicely as you can then come back and tell us how that worked.

Once you do that we can give you meaningful advice for fixing the problems you find.

 

[markbarendt]

Sorry,
It is variable contrast paper. I use filters to work on contrast when printing.

Pushing does the same thing to the final print image that filtering for a harder paper grade does.

Pushing is a holdover from the fixed grade paper days of ancient times.

Pushing (also known as plus development) can be a useful tool but since the advent of good VC paper there is little reason to start with a push.

 

[marciofs]

I'd start with the directions for Acros here http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2011427105392231.pdf No push.

Try printing those negatives at various paper grades as nicely as you can then come back and tell us how that worked.

Once you do that we can give you meaningful advice for fixing the problems you find.

Thank you.

I will try it 1+31 at 20C for 6min.

 

[markbarendt]

Thank you.

I will try it 1+31 at 20C for 6min.

That's ok and it may be very workable, but that's the recommendation for Neopan 400 at 400, not a time recommended for Acros.

I was actually suggesting 1+31 at 20C for 4:30.

6min would be considered a push or plus development for Acros.

 

[marciofs]

That's ok and it may be very workable, but that's the recommendation for Neopan 400 at 400, not a time recommended for Acros.

I was actually suggesting 1+31 at 20C for 4:30.

6min would be considered a push or plus development for Acros.

Well, I shot the across as if it was ISO 400. This is why I thought about 2min more, to compensate the 2stops the higher EI.

But what you are sugesting is to not compesate the push in the development but in the printing?

 

[markbarendt]

Well, I shot the across as if it was ISO 400. This is why I thought about 2min more, to compensate the 2stops the higher EI.

But what you are sugesting is to not compesate the push in the development but in the printing?

That is exactly what I was trying to get you to consider.

Either way can work very nicely. They are essentially the same adjustments in the end.

Two things most people don't really understand are:

• that "pushing your film" doesn't make it magically make Acros (or any other film) more sensitive and more capable of getting more shadow detail
• that "pushing" a film is really a printing adjustment.

When exposure is reduced by say 2 stops (100iso film is shot at 400), then 2 stops of detail at the shadow end of the film curve are given away and simply can't be brought back.

Pushing is just a technique for dealing with the left overs. It puts the black back into the shadows when the faces are printed at a normal placement but IMO it ruins the highlight detail in the print. Using a harder paper grade instead of pushing does the same thing.

A bit of burn can be used instead of a harder paper grade and or pushing, that can make for IMO better highlights in the print.

The choice is yours. You need to try each way to see what really works best.

 

[marciofs]

That is exactly what I was trying to get you to consider.

Either way can work very nicely. They are essentially the same adjustments in the end.

Two things most people don't really understand are:

• that "pushing your film" doesn't make it magically make Acros (or any other film) more sensitive and more capable of getting more shadow detail
• that "pushing" a film is really a printing adjustment.

When exposure is reduced by say 2 stops (100iso film is shot at 400), then 2 stops of detail at the shadow end of the film curve are given away and simply can't be brought back.

Pushing is just a technique for dealing with the left overs. It puts the black back into the shadows when the faces are printed at a normal placement but IMO it ruins the highlight detail in the print. Using a harder paper grade instead of pushing does the same thing.

A bit of burn can be used instead of a harder paper grade and or pushing, that can make for IMO better highlights in the print.

The choice is yours. You need to try each way to see what really works best.

I got it.
Thank you very much.