My vote for the worst 35mm film ever.

[Eric Rose]

The old J&C Classic Pan 400. Extremely grainy, lousy tonal range, very curly, tends to crack between sprocket holes. I've rated it at everywhere from 100asa to 400asa and souped it in D-76 (straight, 1:1, 1:3), Rodinal (1:25, 1:50, 1:100), HC110( dil B and H), PryoCat-HD (2:2:100, 1:1:100, regular agitation and semi stand). For grainy gritty photos it's great for anything else is sucks. The only soups I have left to try is Xtol and DD-X.

If I still didn't have around 100 rolls of the stuff I would give up.

 

[aldevo]

I never used Classic Pan 400. It was, however, Fortepan 400. But certainly it was slower than its rated ISO, very grainy, and not terribly sharp...certainly not virtues for 35mm applications.

Most users actually tended to rave about its tonal range which goes to show how one man's trash is another's treasure.

It had lots of fans, so I'm sure you could find a buyer if you decided to sell your remaining stash.

 

[cmo]

It could be worse: Lucky film from China...

 

[Ian Grant]

It's got to be one of the Maco/Rollei products, the colour neg film with no masking.

Ian

 

[Q.G.]

OrWo slide film.
It produced any colour you liked, as long as it was a muddy brown. So it would qualify as a monochrome film.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

[J&C 400 classic] For grainy gritty photos it's great for anything else is sucks.

Picture of a derelict Lada sitting in the middle of wet potato field under a sullen winter Ceauşescu sky, a broken gaunt defeated tree on the horizon.

 

[fotch]

3M color, don't remember what name it had. I worked for 3M in the 70's and was able to buy it really cheap. Green cast gave me nausea.

In the 80's, I worked at GAF (non photo division) and purchase GAF color film really cheap, and of course I was a bit skeptical. Surprise. Really nice film. As good as anything out there at that time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

3M and Dynachrome - tended to fade circa 1960 to 1970

Steve

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I couldn't remember any bad film until the last 2 posts jolted my memory. I agree that 3M isn't very good but it was cheap!

Jeff

 

[Ian Grant]

I've used 3M products, they gave me free films and Paper to try in the early 80's, very good products then

GAF colour films were strange but good for certain uses and so were the Orwo slide films, I used them before E6 came out and they were significantly better than Kodak E3/4. But E6 took Kodak & Fuji to a level that no other company has reached, although 3M/Ferrania weren't far behind with C41. Sakura/ Konica never caught up with C41 or E6.

Ian

 

[tomkatf]

Polachrome...

Best,
Tom

 

[railwayman3]

TriFCA colour print film.

Or, to be precise, their processing. The first film came back with halves of two adjacent frames on each print...and the negatives strips cut accordingly. :rolleyes:

They sent me a free film when I complained. I binned it. (perhaps it would sell on Ebay now as a collectable...).

The colors were awful too.

 

[WolfTales]

Walgreen's discount color film.

 

[jim appleyard]

Forte 400 and Fuji C-41 from the 70's

 

[André E.C.]

The Chinese Lucky Pan, the thing isn't reliable at all, poor quality control IMHO!


Cheers


André

 

[removed account4]

hmmm i dont' have a worst 35mm film ever, but
i have a worst 35mm film if you use a flash ..
i would have to say tmx ( 100 ) ..
when i shot for a newspaper, i got a bricks of 100 and 400,
xxx, and +x ...
everything worked as expected, except the tmax100 with the flash
was about as useless as you could get. totally blocked up, pretty much the worst.
i have used it since in non-flash situations and it worked OK .. but
with a flash -- forgetaboutit.

 

[skyrick]

Picture of a derelict Lada sitting in the middle of wet potato field under a sullen winter Ceauşescu sky, a broken gaunt defeated tree on the horizon.

Whoa! Great word picture!

Rick

 

[BradS]

The old J&C Classic Pan 400. Extremely grainy, lousy tonal range, very curly, tends to crack between sprocket holes. I've rated it at everywhere from 100asa to 400asa and souped it in D-76 (straight, 1:1, 1:3), Rodinal (1:25, 1:50, 1:100), HC110( dil B and H), PryoCat-HD (2:2:100, 1:1:100, regular agitation and semi stand). For grainy gritty photos it's great for anything else is sucks. The only soups I have left to try is Xtol and DD-X.

If I still didn't have around 100 rolls of the stuff I would give up.

Lots of people loved the stuff. I thought it worked great rayed at EI-200 and dev'd in HC-110B with very gentle agitation. I can't say I loved it...I grew to appreciate and respect it. I did love it's spectral response - never found anything quite like it. If you're getting too much grain...I mean really too much (hey man, it isn't TMY!) you're probably over developing. It was kinda sensitive in that regard.

I don't think you'd have any trouble at all selling it.

 

[lns]

Picture of a derelict Lada sitting in the middle of wet potato field under a sullen winter Ceauşescu sky, a broken gaunt defeated tree on the horizon.

And Vladimir and Estragon saying, "Nothing to be done."

-Laura

 

[removed account4]

Lots of people loved the stuff. I thought it worked great rayed at EI-200 and dev'd in HC-110B with very gentle agitation. I can't say I loved it...I grew to appreciate and respect it. I did love it's spectral response - never found anything quite like it. If you're getting too much grain...I mean really too much (hey man, it isn't TMY!) you're probably over developing. It was kinda sensitive in that regard.

I don't think you'd have any trouble at all selling it.

i'd buy it! i had a hod of it in 120 .. next to neopan400, it is probably my favorite film!
that stuff processes great in coffee and ansco 130 steeped for about 25-30mins.

 

[Mark Fisher]

Another vote for JC400....It was the only film I ever shot that had no redeeming characteristics. I'd like to know what it was so I can avoid it. I've decided that I only use film from the Big Three. Paper is another story........

 

[msage]

hmmm i dont' have a worst 35mm film ever, but
i have a worst 35mm film if you use a flash ..
i would have to say tmx ( 100 ) ..
when i shot for a newspaper, i got a bricks of 100 and 400,
xxx, and +x ...
everything worked as expected, except the tmax100 with the flash
was about as useless as you could get. totally blocked up, pretty much the worst.
i have used it since in non-flash situations and it worked OK .. but
with a flash -- forgetaboutit.

I have used it with flash and got great results!
Michael

 

[phenix]

OrWo slide film.
It produced any colour you liked, as long as it was a muddy brown. So it would qualify as a monochrome film.

Did you solarize it for 20min in full sun? I used several rolls of this film in the late ‘70s, early ‘80s, and remember colors were amazing. However, they washed up after 5 years (not those I kept in the refrigerator).

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The old J&C Classic Pan 400. Extremely grainy, lousy tonal range, very curly, tends to crack between sprocket holes. I've rated it at everywhere from 100asa to 400asa and souped it in D-76 (straight, 1:1, 1:3), Rodinal (1:25, 1:50, 1:100), HC110( dil B and H), PryoCat-HD (2:2:100, 1:1:100, regular agitation and semi stand). For grainy gritty photos it's great for anything else is sucks. The only soups I have left to try is Xtol and DD-X.

If I still didn't have around 100 rolls of the stuff I would give up.

Yeah, not a great choice for 35mm. There were two versions of Fortepan 400 in recent history. The earlier one didn't have a very good density range, particularly not for contact printing in large format. This was before J&C, so I don't think any of this film was sold as "ClassicPan 400." I had some in 8x10" from Fotoimpex under the brand "Classic 400," and I think I ended up tossing half a box. Forte and Fotoimpex responded to complaints and improved it, and the later version was a pretty nice film in large format--sort of like Tri-X with more controllable highlights, but not as tight grain as Tri-X. It could be exposed just like Tri-X in a variety of developers, with a slightly longer development time.

Because of the grain, it was kind of borderline in medium format, and not a good choice for 35mm. Try it in PMK. The grain masking effect might help.

 

[fschifano]

Lucky Pan. Balls out the worst crap I've ever used. Never again.