Fuji Neopan development help

Hi everyone,

I hope someone can help. I've just returned from a few days in Budapest. Unfortunately, the weather was a lot better than I expected The downside of which is I ran out of HP5 Plus

In desperation I've used Fuji Neopan 1600 at 400 E.I. However, the only development times I can find for Neopan at 400 is with Fuji Microfine. The only problem is I haven't got any of this developer and it doesn't appear to be available in the UK.

I have got Perceptol, Microphen and Rodinal at hand however and I wondered if anyone else had rated Neopan 1600 at 400 E.I and could give me the benefit of their experience.

thanks,

Brian

Well, the MDC lists Neopan 1600 exposed at 400 and developed in Microdol (same times for Perceptol) at 6.5 minutes at 20 c.

HTH,

The true speed is something like 2/3 of a stop faster than Neopan_400, so you're not as overexposed as you thought.

Tthe Fujifilm pdf for Neopan_1600 lists times at 400 as follows (at 20degC):

D-76 4min
D-76(1+1) 5.5min
Microdol-X 6.5min

These times are pretty short. I read that it was designed so that Neopan_1600 at 1600 (actually pushed to 1600) could be developed in the same tank as Neopan_400 at 400 (not pushed).

Drop me a PM with email address if you can't find the pdf on the web.

My personal experience with this film is that it can get very flat with overexposure. I shoot it at 800, but who knows, me at 800 could be the same as you at 400. I would develop in XTOL 1:1 starting at the recommended time for EI 400 on a TEST ROLL, but would probably end up with a longer time.

For my personal taste I usually end up developing with XTOL at the published times for the EI one stop faster than my actual shooting EI. So if I shoot at 800 I develop for the published 1600 time. 1:1, or 1:2 in very bright sun, or thereabouts.

I'm no expert, but my current strategy for overexposure in bright light with fast films would be to use a short time with a strong developer solution in order to retain highlight contrast and minimize film speed.

Perhaps this would be a good time to use a developer with a reputation for film speed loss? Microdol X perhaps?

Fred Aspen said:

Well, the MDC lists ...
HTH,

Click to expand...

What's the MDC?

MMfoto said:

What's the MDC?

Click to expand...

MDC

To add to John's comments, D76 (Kodak packaged D76, not mixed from formula) gives a gamma of 0.48 at 4 minutes, 20C, EI400. The 1+1 time is 5.5 minutes. 0.48 is a suitable value for a condenser style enlarger, a little soft for a diffused type. Fuji Microfine (very similar to Microdol-X or Perceptol) at 6.5 minutes (EI400, 20C) gives a gamma closer to 0.60, OK for a diffusion enlarger, but rather stiff for a condenser. So, without running tests, D76 1+1 might be the easiest and surest choice.

I have been using NP1600 for quite a while.

I have found that it's speed for me, is 800 asa.

I use D76 1+1 and with my diffused enlarger, I am getting very good negs that print at or near grade 3 to 3 1/2 with 10'.45" seconds of development @ 20C.

A few weeks ago I was using NP1600 and changed lens in the middle of a roll, unfortunately I left the new lens at f5.6 instead of f8 for about 6 frames before I noticed the error.

Apart from the obvious density difference of the negatives, those over exposed frames, printed virtually the same as the correctly exposed ones, once exposure times and slight contrast grade adjustments were made, that is.

I don't think you are in too much trouble at all.

Mick.

thanks for your suggestions everyone. I've been doing some research and it looks like Dead Link Removed rate Neopan 1600 at ISO 400. So I could develop the film in Rodinal as recommended in Agfa's fact sheet. However, this might be a little too grainy for the types of shots I've taken.

I could try Perceptol stock at 6.5 mins, the problem being I'm not sure of the inversion methods used and I don't want to lose the highlights as the contrast range was pretty amazing out in Hungary.

Then again I was thinking about the problem last night and I remembered that I've got some of Barry Thornton's DiXactol Ultra (unopened). This type of developer is useful as most films are developed for the same time (I think Delta 400 is the odd one out). However, it is not normally used on high speed films as most are actually pushed a stop or more. However, if agfa are to be believed and ISO speed of the film is actually 400, then this developer might be exactly what I need. Hmm, I might give it a try.

I only bought three rolls of Neopan 1600, the first I rated at 1250 and developed in Microphen, but compared to Delta 3200 there simply wasn't any shadow detail. So, now I've used the last two rolls I can't see me using the film again (as long as Ilford stays around that is) and consequently it's not really worth purchasing more to conduct development tests.


Thanks again for all your replies. I'll let you know how I get on.


Brian

I know it sort of goes contrary to what you might expect, but try your Neopan 1600 in Rodinal 1+50. Even when shot at 1000 or 1600, the results are surprisingly good and grain is not really a problem.

With some reluctance, I'll pass on my own Perceptol and Neopan 1600 results: Perceptol 1+3 (100ml + 300ml), 24C, 7.5 minutes. Pre-soak, then 30 seconds of initial agitation, then 3 inversions over 5 seconds each minute. Patterson double reel plastic tank, with one empty reel as a spacer. EI is about 500. This gives me a somewhat softer negative that I prefer for 35mm. I say 'with some reluctance' because film developing times can be so personal. But Perceptol 1+3 (and your EI400) should be fairly forgiving.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I've taken the plunge and developed both the films in DiXactal. I used the single bath, semi-stand option for 10.5 mins at 24 degrees C. The negatives look pretty good; there looks to be shadow detail (something I didn't get at 1250 E.I) and the highlights appear to be intact. However, I won't really know how good they are until the weekend when I can get a couple of contact sheets done. This is especially true as DiXactol is a staining developer and as such will behave slightly differently to how it looks.

If you're interested I'll post print when I've done one.

Thanks again for the suggestions.


Brian