ILFORD PAN 400 pushed to 1600 in R09. How Long ?

[alex645]

hello, hope that's the right place for questions .. Does anybody know how long should I develope with R09 an ILFORD pan 400 pushed to 1600 ? I cannot find the info on the official instructions of R09 or in other threads .. And I cannot figure out a pattern to follow through developing times . Ilford pan 400 pushed to 800 should be allright in 1+25 for 8 minutes, so maybe 11 minutes ?
Is there a kind of formula to follow to have the correct time or it's just guesswork? Sorry I'm a newbie
I know that rodinal it's a poor choice for pushing, but it's what I've got at the moment .. should I wait and use something else ? Many thanks

 

[mr.datsun]

I haven't heard of Ilford Pan 400. Do you mean HP5+?

1+25 : 1600 = 12mins
1+50 : 1600 = 24mins

from the "Rodinal / R09 ONE SHOT" list pdf supplied by macodirect.de. I think this list a crib from the The Massive Dev Chart. It's got all the RO9 times you could need. www.digitaltruth.com

Should you use another dev? I'm sure other people will say yes and then it depends what you are trying to achieve. I use HP5+ in RO9 at 1+25 and found that the film needs 5s agitation every 30s to prevent 'so-called' bromide drag or underdeveloped areas on the film.

But people have used this combination you can see it and other ideas about HP5+ at 1600 here:

http://filmdev.org/recipe/search?search=HP5+1600

Here's a very nice example at 1600 done in RO9 1+25:

http://filmdev.org/recipe/show/5948

 

[alex645]

It's a 135, I think it's available for certain markets only, a kind of budget equivalent of the HP5+

THanks for the link to the massive dev chart, I've found this:

Ilford Pan 400 R09 1+40 21 min for 400 ISO

I'm still puzzled, first of all the list on my bottle of R09 gives me only 1+25 and 1+50 dilutions, not the 1+40 above .. and if 21 min is advised for 400, sounds like I'll need a day off to develope with the pushing! Should I stick with the HP5+ times and crossfingers ?

 

[brucemuir]

I've seen Ilford Pan 400 mentioned before but thought it was a c41 b/w film like XP2
Perhaps this is am Asian market product?

I wouldn't select R09/Rodinol for pushing but thats me.
I know some probably like it and are adept at semi/stand developing and probably get the look they like.

 

[alex645]

the Neopan CN is the one for c-41 .. I'm on my first trials and errors, that's why I still cannot figure out precisely how a difference in time / dilution will affect the final negative

 

[brucemuir]

Ah, okay my bad.
I was thinking of the c41 neopan.

Do you have any d76 or xtol maybe? I'm thinking if this stuff is a budget HP5+ it will be grainy in Rodinol, especially with a 2 stop push.


I've used Microphen for for some higher rated film like Neopan 1600 rated at 800-1000 but wasn't real crazy about initial results but I'm sure that was my inexperience with the combo.

Generally I've seen recommendations of 15-20% extra time for each stop pushed as a starting point.

 

[erikg]

It's not HP-5, but that would be a place to start, that and the Kentmere 400. I wouldn't go with a rodinal type for a push but some people like it. I would look at a number of 400 speed films and see what the average percentage increase is for the push and go with that. Scene specific testing would be the only way to be truly precise.

 

[alex645]

at the moment i only have R09 .. anyway grain is not an issue .. I think I'll go for 30% extra time (28 min in 1+40) even if sounds like a loong time

 

[erikg]

30% for a two stop push is not unreasonable, it may be on the short side but extended dev can only go so far. Sounds like a safe approach.

 

[mabman]

To clarify, is the question about "Calbe R09"/"Fomadon R09" or is it about "R09 One Shot"?

If the OP isn't aware, after the demise of Agfa, the chem division and naming rights were sold a couple of times. So, bottom line:

- "R09 One Shot" (also known as "Adonal" or "Blazinal", depending on where you live) is exactly the same formulation as the pre-bankruptcy Agfa Rodinal
- "Calbe R09"/"Fomadon R09" is essentially an earlier formula of Rodinal, which was actively produced in the former East Germany even after the western Agfa changed theirs.

They have different dilutions and times per film, which can be quite confusing. So, if you have "R09 One Shot", depending on which charts you are looking at, it might be easier to just look up times for "Rodinal". If, however, you have Calbe/Fomadon R09, then you would look up times for "R09" itself.

That said, if you have the time but don't want to experiment with the film, I really like semi-stand development with Rodinal 1+200, agitate for 30 sec. (5 slow inversions), leave for 1 hr, agitate again for 30 sec, leave for another hour, dump, stop, fix, wash. It develops any film to completion, so it will work for Ilford Pan 400 as well.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Ilford Pan 400 is a unique film, not available in North America. I picked up a bunch in Asia and love it (but that's just personal taste).

I pushed mine to 1600 using DD-X and absolutely loved it -- the grain was beautiful and tones printed quite easily.

For R09, I'd certainly be OK with using the MDC as a starting point, and 30% extra for a push is a good starting point also.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

hello, hope that's the right place for questions .. Does anybody know how long should I develope with R09 an ILFORD pan 400 pushed to 1600 ? I cannot find the info on the official instructions of R09 or in other threads .. And I cannot figure out a pattern to follow through developing times . Ilford pan 400 pushed to 800 should be allright in 1+25 for 8 minutes, so maybe 11 minutes ?
Is there a kind of formula to follow to have the correct time or it's just guesswork? Sorry I'm a newbie
I know that rodinal it's a poor choice for pushing, but it's what I've got at the moment .. should I wait and use something else ? Many thanks

Rodinal isn't necessarily a poor developer for pushing. If you dilute the developer, time becomes your friend, because the longer the film is in the developer, the more shadow detail will appear.
What's important to remember is that somebody else's data might not fit your printing or results, so some experimentation is always in order.
If it were me doing this, I would dilute the developer 1+100, make sure you have at least 4ml of concentrate in the tank, agitate every two minutes for 10s (after initially agitating for the entire first minute), and then develop the film for as long as it takes until you have the contrast in the negative that you need. It might be 25 minutes, and it might be 35 minutes. Only your printing, your paper and paper developer, and your vision of what constitutes a good print, can be the judge of how long you need to develop your negatives.

You could make another test roll with the Ilford 400, and only develop one third of the test roll at a time (by cutting the length of the film in thirds), and adjust your developing time until you see the contrast in the negatives that you want. Do this before you shoot anything important.

 

[alex645]

To clarify, is the question about "Calbe R09"/"Fomadon R09" or is it about "R09 One Shot"?

If the OP isn't aware, after the demise of Agfa, the chem division and naming rights were sold a couple of times. So, bottom line:

- "R09 One Shot" (also known as "Adonal" or "Blazinal", depending on where you live) is exactly the same formulation as the pre-bankruptcy Agfa Rodinal
- "Calbe R09"/"Fomadon R09" is essentially an earlier formula of Rodinal, which was actively produced in the former East Germany even after the western Agfa changed theirs.

They have different dilutions and times per film, which can be quite confusing. So, if you have "R09 One Shot", depending on which charts you are looking at, it might be easier to just look up times for "Rodinal". If, however, you have Calbe/Fomadon R09, then you would look up times for "R09" itself.

That said, if you have the time but don't want to experiment with the film, I really like semi-stand development with Rodinal 1+200, agitate for 30 sec. (5 slow inversions), leave for 1 hr, agitate again for 30 sec, leave for another hour, dump, stop, fix, wash. It develops any film to completion, so it will work for Ilford Pan 400 as well.

mistery solved ! the 1+40 dilution chart is the one for theCalbe/Fomadon.
The one for the Ilford Pan 400
Ilford Pan 400 Rodinal 1+25 iso800 8 min
1600 iso is out of the chart so I suppose dev time will be close to 10 mins, considering that for iso 400 in 1+25 it is 6 mins. I just wonder what kind of agitation will be better, I usually stir 5 sec every 30.
I've found the right chart for the R09 ne shot, that's the one for the Rodinal. Thanks everybody for the responses , the thread grew interesting .. I tried the stand development on a test film 1+100 for 1 hour, 30 sec of agitation after 30 min. Looks like it worked fine. Unfortunately I remembered that I had the Pan 400 from ebay (for really cheap, posted from Indonesia), so I have to wait until I can do more tests on the same type of film. thanks !!!

 

[AFPQ]

Hello there!
Thank you for all the valuable information on this thread.
Although it's been a long time since the last post I was wondering if you could post your final results for the developing times with R09 for Ilford Pan pushed to 1600.
Thank you in advance.

 

[Ghostman]

Pan 100 and 400 technical data sheet.

 

[AFPQ]

Hi Ghostman. Thank you for the technical sheet.
Unfortunately there's o info for Rodinal with Ilford pan pushed to 1600.
Should I go for the one hour 1+100 development as mentioned above?
Cheers

 

[Ghostman]

Why don't you try and stand develop it in Rodinal. 1:100 for 1 hour. See what you get.