Kodak Panatomic-X film ???

[thefizz]

I received a roll of 35mm Kodak Panatomic-X film from a photographer who is going to planet Digital. It has an ASA of 32 and thats really all the info I got at the moment.

Has anyone got any experience with this film?
What are its characteristics?
What soup is best suited? (I have Rodinal, Rodinal Special (Studinol) & Tmax)

He also gave me a roll of Technical Pan 2415 (ESTAR-AH Base). Is this the same as the Technical Pan which was discontinued last year.

Peter

 

[jim appleyard]

Pan-X was a great film. It was discontinued around 1985. I hope yours is still good.

I got some of my best negs from Pan-X, and this was before I knew what I was doing. I would shoot it at an EI of 32 (TTL meter) and soup it in D-76 1+0. Nice tonality and very little dodging or burning to do. I miss this stuff.

I think now I'd go for Rodinal as Pan-X is already fine-grained enough; no need for D-76 1+0!

Yes, your Tech Pan is the same discontinued film.

 

[Ronald Moravec]

Film has not been made in years. I would use 6 frames on the front to detirmine current speed and proper developing time. Pull ot 12 inches in the dark to do this.

Used to work fine in any developer. In 1960 I used it in 4x5. Wow. Later 35mm was used.

Pan X was the quality king, but it is now eclipsed by Delta 100 and T Max 100.

 

[jimgalli]

Still using Pan X. Aerial recon roll film. I have some 5" wide long rolls that I cut into 5X7 sheets. Awesome film. Contrast can be hard to control and you need a few test rolls to get things dialed in. Rodinal 1:100 is indeed a good choice. Times are still short even at that dilution. I'd start at ei32 and 6 1/2 min in the 1:100. 5X7's made with stuff have given me the nicest platinum palladium gradients I've seen so far.

 

[df cardwell]

Nice long straight line, lovely film.
All its best virtues live on as TMX.

Something sticks in my memory about 1+ 50 for 12 minutes,
agitating once every minute.

Studional would be great for 120 Panatomic.
Sigh.

.

 

[bobfowler]

I did a lot of reversal processing of Pan-X back in the mid 1970's. Like Jim said, contrast control can be tricky with this film, but the results were worth it.

 

[thefizz]

Thank you all for your help. I think I'll cut the roll into three and re-spool them. I'll test one roll in Rodinal 1:100 and take it from there.

Thanks again,
Peter

 

[mmcclellan]

This was actually one of my all-time favorite films, but sadly it's not made any more. Ilford Pan-F is an excellent substitute, as is Efke 25, and they rate at about the same EI.

 

[fschifano]

With only 1 roll of the stuff, I wouldn't even bother exposing it. I'd rather keep it as a museum piece or something. One roll is not enough to get any real useful data from and even if you did, what good would it do? The film hasn't been made since 1985. There's not much of it still available. Chances are better than good that whatever you might find is no good. These other guys are right. TMX and Delta 100 have outclassed this film. If you want to play with a slow retro style film, get a few rolls of PanF+, Efke KB25, or Efke KB50 and knock yourself out.

 

[Papa Tango]

I guess that I'm just a slow, retro kind of guy...

 

[haziz]

Film has not been made in years. I would use 6 frames on the front to detirmine current speed and proper developing time. Pull ot 12 inches in the dark to do this.

Used to work fine in any developer. In 1960 I used it in 4x5. Wow. Later 35mm was used.

Pan X was the quality king, but it is now eclipsed by Delta 100 and T Max 100.

The "negative" in Polaroid Type 55 film is reputed to be Panatomic X so in some sense the film lives on in 4x5 size. Many people use it with exposure aimed for the negative, including rarely myself.

Sincerely,

Hany.

 

[25asa]

I miss Panatomix-X.

 

[fwp]

The "negative" in Polaroid Type 55 film is reputed to be Panatomic X so in some sense the film lives on in 4x5 size. Many people use it with exposure aimed for the negative, including rarely myself.

Sincerely,

Hany.

I've heard the same thing.

 

[Curt]

I have a half dozen rolls of Panatomic-X left and some Agfa Pan 25. Remnants of days long gone. I'll use them this Summer for sure with Agfa Rodinal. If I could have one film remade it would without a doubt be Panatomic-X. Such a clean clear base and high quality film. I used a lot of it and still have hundreds of negatives to print. So in a way I am not finished with it.

 

[PhotoBob]

I received a roll of 35mm Kodak Panatomic-X film from a photographer who is going to planet Digital. It has an ASA of 32 and thats really all the info I got at the moment.

Has anyone got any experience with this film?
What are its characteristics?
What soup is best suited? (I have Rodinal, Rodinal Special (Studinol) & Tmax)

He also gave me a roll of Technical Pan 2415 (ESTAR-AH Base). Is this the same as the Technical Pan which was discontinued last year.

Peter

Sorry about that, some how the earlier message got away from me.
HC-110 (B) 20 C /24 C
5min /4min (but I wouldn't recommend less than 5min)
Polydol 6.5/ 4.25
D:76 (1:1) 8.5 /6
Microdol-X 8.5/6

Hope this is of some use to you. If I'm not mistaken Ilford ID-11 is similar to D-76.

Take Care,
Bob St.Cyr

 

[Sparky]

I started using panatomic-x for probably 3-4 years before it's disapperance. But I switched to pan F because I thought it's tonality was WAY better. I was never really all that keen on the "Kodak curve". I don't know what it is. But I don't really miss it that much for shooting. Too bad it's not around anymore though. I am a bit nostalgic I suppose.

 

[thefizz]

Thank you all, I haven't tried it yet but will give it a go soon and see what I get.

Peter