How do you use Ilford Pan F Plus?

Over the past few months I have been using my small stock of Ilford Pan F Plus and I am finding that I personally like the smoothness and tonal qualities I am seeing. So far I have only used it for some landscape and still life work but I am still learning how best to use the film. I am currently exposing between EI-32 and EI-50 and developing it most often in D-23 though I have also used some Rodinal.

I have done some of the normal internet and forum searches around this film but I am curious how some of the forum members here use and develop this film? The only really consistent information I have gathered from my various searches is that the film does not seem to retain a latent image for long so you are best served by using it and then developing it right away. Obviously it requires a bit more light or the use of a tripod based on the film speed, but beyond those two things I have not really developed a clear sense from my research where this film really shines and where it may not be the best option.

Thoughts, ideas and especially experiences are greatly appreciated and, obviously, examples are always loved.

I'll be watching this thread closely, Dan.

I've only used Pan F a couple of times and didn't really give it enough of a chance to find it's strengths. I wasn't working very methodically back then and the contrast got a little out of control so I just gave up.
I'm older, more experienced and more patient now and, with our choices of slow films dwindling, should really give Pan F another chance.

I've shot it as various speeds from EI 20 to EI 80 and souped in everything from D-23 (including D-23 water bath), Pyrocat HD, Rodinal and Diafine. Each combo has its strength, but I give the edge to Rodinal, 1+100, 19 min., 1 inversion every other minute at EI25; that's for 35mm. For 120, I use 20 min. at EI20. The Pyrocat negs print well, but scan lousy. Rodinal prints easily and helps keep highlights in check.

I didn't find anything special with use of this film. Went through one bulk of it. As any low ISO film it is demanding for correct exposure. And as with any low speed film it is bad idea to push it.
I develop all bw films in HC-110.

I've used it in Rodinal 1+50, D-76 1+1, and PMK with great results. I think Rodinal is my favorite though.

Simply iso 50 in Ilfosol 1:14.

Sure, you’d probably like to hear something like “over expose 1 stop and stand develop for 3 hours” but really, the magic is in the recomended times with the recomended agitation scheme. Anything else is con-artistry and ego BS.

Here are 2 prints. Beautiful stuff.
And remember, ilfosol-3 gives more acuity than Rodinal. Fabulous stuff.

I develop it in replenished xtol at 24C, 7:30 in a jobo. It’s about 0.62 contrast if shot at 50. If you want to shoot it at 25, you can pull the dev down to 5-6 minute range for contrast in the mid to high 50s. 6 minutes nets ~0.57 shot at 25.

In terms of format, I don’t bulk load and Ilford does not seem to make 135 format available in anything other than 36 exposures, which for me is a bit of a bummer unless I plan to shoot all 36 exposures over a couple of days as it does not keep very well. In 120, my preferred format for this, it’s spectacular with replenished xtol. I wish they made it in sheet for studio work.

I’ve posted a few recent panf shots in the standard gallery recently, and will put more up if you want to see more, just look under my media. I’ve got a couple dozen rolls of 135 and 120 I’ve been trying to work through.

I'm another who's not going to recommend shooting at 125ISO and developing in sea water for 3 hours...or some other unusual combo.

I haven't used Pan F+ for some years but I always shot it at ISO 50, developed in good old faithful ID11 as per Ilford's instructions and got some wonderful photos. I shot in sunlight so no worried about using a tripod. The info about the latent image is correct, Ilford specifically recommend processing within three months of shooting. In practice I always processed within two weeks of the first shot.

Agulliver said:

The info about the latent image is correct, Ilford specifically recommend processing within three months of shooting. In practice I always processed within two weeks of the first shot.

Click to expand...

Two weeks - that's good practice, I do the same. Three months is too much.
I like PanF Plus 120 in Rodinal 1:25 (@ EI 25) or Moersch two bath MZB, depending on the subject.
Delta 100 is technically nearly the same, but I prefer PanF for it's look (hard to describe).
If more speed is needed TriX 120 in a second camera...

Best
Jens

I have a roll of Pan F in a camera that has one or two exposures on it. It has been sitting on a shelf for perhaps seven to eight years. Would it be a waste of chemicals to try to develop it?

This film is good, but compared with TMX (T Max 100), I would take the Kodak. One thing in favor with Pan F + is its reluctance to gain excessive contrast. I think that this is why it has a bit of a 'variable' EI. In fact, if the scene is not too contrasty, you could expose at anything from 20 to 80 and be very happy. However, grain is no better than TMX, maybe a bit inferior.

Years ago Freestyle was selling bulk rolls of Arista 50 and I am almost certain that it was re-named Pan F +. It is a good film, a very good film, but nothing more. One really good thing in its favor is its lack of fussiness with a particular developer. - David Lyga

I only put it in a camera if I know I’m going to shoot off the whole roll. I have a bulk roll in 35mm so I can do short loads. I develop it in beer, but then I develop most film in beer. The shot below is on 120 film developed in beer.

Bumpers and Rigging by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Pioneer said:

Over the past few months I have been using my small stock of Ilford Pan F Plus and I am finding that I personally like the smoothness and tonal qualities I am seeing. So far I have only used it for some landscape and still life work but I am still learning how best to use the film. I am currently exposing between EI-32 and EI-50 and developing it most often in D-23 though I have also used some Rodinal.

I have done some of the normal internet and forum searches around this film but I am curious how some of the forum members here use and develop this film? The only really consistent information I have gathered from my various searches is that the film does not seem to retain a latent image for long so you are best served by using it and then developing it right away. Obviously it requires a bit more light or the use of a tripod based on the film speed, but beyond those two things I have not really developed a clear sense from my research where this film really shines and where it may not be the best option.

Thoughts, ideas and especially experiences are greatly appreciated and, obviously, examples are always loved.

Click to expand...

Well from my point PanF is no film for superior tonals! Yes it was - but that was the past!
That "plus" from the name isn't such important it is still the PanF we know (with some reformulation)!
Today there are of course other Films wich can be better for tonals!
So what about Fp4 - you have more speed and you can play also a good game for tonals via exposure and development!
Friends there are also some more better films if it has to go about findest grain!
Delta 100 for example!
So there is no need to use PanF any longer? Away with this dinosaurus of the past ?
(Remember a couple of years [decades] Hp5 was highest priced in relation to Fp4/PanF)
Today PanF is more expensive than Fp4!
Burn the PanF it is scratch !

????? - Why ?

PanF is a film from low speed - if your preference isn't 100% on tonals (there are better films remember) - why not have a look on the characteristic in regard of smalest grain!

To me the PanF is a cheap alternate to micro/document films of lowest ISO!

Yes - you would need a tripot and a zeiss lens btw. but PanF is also able to play in that class!

with regards

PS : I can't recognize what some fellows had problems with latent image stability!
And I am the last one who is hurriing up to come to close development (in short time)!
But that is perhaps relative?

David Lyga said:

Years ago Freestyle was selling bulk rolls of Arista 50 and I am almost certain that it was re-named Pan F + - David Lyga

Click to expand...

You can call Ilford and ASK !But I am sure they will swear :No - Never that C A N ' T B E
PanF that seams to be absolute imposible! And we insure you we have no information about here!

with regards

PS : My god - then you have to phone the 237 other manufacturers who are actualy producing
ISO 50 bw film - that could be most expensive (237 additional phone calls)
PPS : I got one of the last 152,5m rolls PolypanF = 5 x 30,5 m = 67 bucks = ~100 films =
~ 67 cent per film - so lets have a short look :



OK B&H is realy good from pricing (I've seen it much more expensive - my local dealer is extreme crazy if it goes about this film - but "therefore" he has closed meanwhile - no sympathy)

But there is a great difference (factor ~ 11 ) [ 67cent to 7,49 ]

trendland said:

I got one of the last 152,5m rolls PolypanF = 5 x 30,5 m = 67 bucks = ~100 films =
~ 67 cent per film

Click to expand...

Which has nothing to do with Ilford PanF+ obviously.

I bought an entire CASE of 120 PanF+ from Midwest Photo (found it when I was scrounging in their basement) for a dollar a roll. Not too shabby. It's been sitting in the deep freeze in my basement all this time. In the past I have always liked it in PMK Pyro Plus, (right out of Gordon Hutching's "Art of Pyro" book). The "Plus" is a tiny shot of Amidol, that adds about 1/3 stop of actual shadow speed.

Maybe I will try that scenario again in the near future.

shoot @25, develop in DD-X, I have had stunning results. But I would not wait more than a week to develop. After a couple months you will have completely blank film.

Ilford says the latent image starts to disappear after about three months, but best to be conservative about this! I always developed exposed PanF ASAP.

What?? No good tonality?
This was fast. So we now have a new internet myth.

Pan-f has superb tonality! And it is unmatched for portraits since its sensitivity to red is lower than, say, fp4! It is unmatched in this regard, therefore it gives unique results.

JPD said:

I have a roll of Pan F in a camera that has one or two exposures on it. It has been sitting on a shelf for perhaps seven to eight years. Would it be a waste of chemicals to try to develop it?

Click to expand...

If you shoot the rest of the roll, those current shots will be absolutely fine.

MattKing said:

If you shoot the rest of the roll, those current shots will be absolutely fine.

Click to expand...

Good, then I can finish and develop it together with my next fresh roll.

Absolutely. But those two old ones will have gone away...........

Great responses. Thanks a lot.

When the sun is out here in Nevada I have no problems handholding with this film but I tend to carry a tripod anyway when shooting something this slow. As I already mentioned, I have been impressed with the tonal quality I am getting when I develop in D-23 1:3. I already use a lot of different films including TMX100, FP4+ and Silvermax bt so far Pan F just seems different to me, though I could always be fooling myself. I have been known to do that. I used to shoot a lot of Efke 25 and I might be seeing some of what impressed me so much with that film.

I should be clear. I am not looking for exotic and wild ways to shoot or develop this film nor am I looking for alternatives to this one right now. I am just trying to get a handle on how best to use and develop the rolls I have right now to determine whether or not I want to buy more when I run out. Right now I seem to have about 12 rolls in 120 and a little less than that in 35mm so I have enough to do a bit of experimenting. All of it expired back in 2014 which is one reason why I have been shooting the last couple of rolls at EI-32 but it doesn't appear that should be a problem so I think I'll try a few rolls at box speed.

Obviously the film speed limits its use in some areas, it isn't something I will take to a basketball game or race track. Ilford specifically recommends architecture, still life and fashion work and I have already played with some of that (though I am not really into fashion photography) but am also interested in seeing what other areas it could be useful. Quite a few of you have given me some great ideas already. Though I had kind of discounted it for street use it would appear that a couple you have had some success with it in that area so I will try it out as well.

Another question comes up with developing. There are obviously a lot of options without getting too exotic (I doubt I'll be using any beer for development though I may use some WHILE developing.) But there are lots of other things that affect the process. Most of you seem to use pretty standard methods but I noticed at least one is using continuous agitation with a Jobo system. Have any of you noticed any problems with continuous agitation. Likewise it would seem that Rodinal is a favored developer, which I have tried in the past but will look at again. Another odd thing I noticed is the use of what I would consider very short developing times of 4 minutes with HC110 style developers. This is usually considered a bit of a no-no because there isn't a lot of margin for error and usually films have barely started developing within that short of a time period. Of course I could be wrong here as well or perhaps Pan F Plus starts developing earlier than other films. I do notice that the response curve has very little toe or shoulder and is pretty straightline once an image starts developing.

Anyway, so many questions and so little time. I am headed out again today with a couple of rolls of 120 Pan F Plus and the macro lens on my Pentax 645Nii to see what happens.

Pioneer said:

Most of you seem to use pretty standard methods but I noticed at least one is using continuous agitation with a Jobo system.

Click to expand...

I use a Jobo with continuous agitation whenever I can. It mostly works fine, particularly at 30rpm, with a few exceptions:
On 35mm, no problem. Everything from B&W to color goes in the Jobo.
120: at certain frames there is some density variation along the edge of the film. It seems to be associated with the geometry of the reels I use (the standard reels for the 15xx tanks).
4x5: I use a 2500 series tank and the old-style (no N suffix) reel and that gives me density variations along the edges. Therefore I sometimes do 4x5 in trays.
90% of my film goes in the Jobo though.

Hi Dan
I typically expose it somewhere around sunny 11, maybe sunny 8 and develop it split 72F ansco130 1:10 for 5 minutes 1min, 10 sec/1min
followed directly by Sumatranol 130 ( sumatra caffenol c spiked with ansco 130 20cc/L ) 72ºF continuous agitation 5 minutes ..
My results are to die for. I'd think about developing soon after you expose the film, some people have reported
shorter "latent image retention" with Pan F. Not sure how true it is, cause it took me 3-4 months to process the film I exposed.
I had no issue, so with everything >>> YMMV

John