Kodak TMX100 / TFX vs Ilford Pan-F / FA-1027

Tower and Moon

A
Tower and Moon

  • 0
  • 0
  • 132
Light at Paul's House

A
Light at Paul's House

  • 2
  • 1
  • 153
Slowly Shifting

Slowly Shifting

  • 0
  • 0
  • 213
Waiting

Waiting

  • 0
  • 0
  • 246
Night Drive 2

D
Night Drive 2

  • 1
  • 0
  • 1K

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,715
Messages
2,795,553
Members
100,009
Latest member
Yaroslav314
Recent bookmarks
0

Wally H

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
160
Location
...
Format
Med. Format RF
I am considering changing my film / developer combination from Kodak's TMX100 (120) and Photographer's Formulary TFX-2 developer to Ilford's PAN-F (120) and Photographer's Formulary FA-1027. I develope using a JOBO ATL2000 rotary processor. Does anyone have any experience or comments that might be appropriate?

I'll do testing and densitometry, but thought other's may have further insite.
 

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
I am considering changing my film / developer combination from Kodak's TMX100 (120) and Photographer's Formulary TFX-2 developer to Ilford's PAN-F (120) and Photographer's Formulary FA-1027. I develope using a JOBO ATL2000 rotary processor. Does anyone have any experience or comments that might be appropriate?

I'll do testing and densitometry, but thought other's may have further insite.

I'd be more inclined to go with Kodak's TMX100 AND Ilford Delta 100 developed in Crawley's FX-2 or the Formulary version of FX-2 (TFX-2). For my own work I use both of these films developed in Pyrocat-HD or Pyrocat-MC.
 

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
I googled FA-1027 and found this FA- 1027 Developer thread: Dead Link Removed

I downloaded the associated FA PDF file. FA-1027 developer is a FINE ARTS product and the FINE ARTS description of FA-1027 is long on fluff, bombast and hyperbole - it set off my BS detector many times. Whoever wrote this spent a lot of time badmouthing Kodak D-76 and they didn't do their homework first!

I'd stick with Crawley's FX-2 or PF's TFX-2.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
1,827
Location
Plymouth. UK
Format
Multi Format
Paterson FX39 is also a good choice with these films. It yields surprisingly fine grain for a high definition developer.
 

Lee L

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
3,281
Format
Multi Format
FX-39 is now hard to find in the US, where the OP lives. See the APUG non-staining developers section for the FX-37 formula, posted by Gerald Koch, which Crawley says is the published formula closest to FX-39. FX-37 was formulated for T-grain type films, but is said to work well for slower traditional films or higher speed traditional films at enlargement factors less than 12.

I like Rodinal 1:100 and reduced agitation with slower traditional films, and have had good results with Gainer's suggested addition of sodium ascorbate for this application.

Lee
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom