Neopan 1600 in Perceptol

Does anyone have a starting time and EI for Neopan 1600 in Perceptol?

Thanks

wintoid said:

Does anyone have a starting time and EI for Neopan 1600 in Perceptol?

Thanks

Click to expand...

In one of my searches for Perceptol and Neopan 1600 I came across this thread " Neopan 1600 in Perceptol" which has the unusual distinction on APUG of being a complete "waif and stray" acknowledged by no-one. I hope the OP,wintoid, wasn't put off by lack of response and is still an APUGer. However be that as it may, does anyone now have a response to make? Hopefully there is a Perceptol and Neopan 1600 user out there in the great APUG. I am certainly interested in trying this combo. Any users out there?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Undiluted Neopan will barely get you a usable EI of 800. If you want to shoot it at 1600 and use Perceptol you should dilute the perceptol 1:3. This will give you very long developing times at 68F. You might try developing with 1:3 Perceptol at 75F. By comparing the times for Neopan 400 or Tri-X in Perceptol 1:3 you should be able to estimate something for Neopan 1600.

Michael R 1974 said:

I've done alot of Perceptol testing lately but only with slower films. I'm curious as to why OP and Pentaxuser are interested in this combo though - ie fast film with slow developer.

Click to expand...

My interest? That's simple. Ilford quote a time for D3200 at box speed in stock Perceptol and surprisingly I find that it works quite well except that D3200 is one of the few Ilford films where the dev times are a bit out. I have found that Perceptol with D3200 like DDX with D3200 does better if you increase the dev time.

So on that basis I am curious as to how Neopan 1600 does in Perceptol but like wintoid I am looking to an answer. Ilford doesn't quote anything for Neopna 1600 but I can see no reason why thee shouldn't be a time if one is quoted for Ilford's own flagship high speed film in Perceptol. It may be that Ilford never bothered with this combo. Wintoid never got an answerone as you will see and maybe left APUG feeling "unwanted". If he did that's a pity but strictly not my concern.

However I thought it worth resurrecting in case there were others since the original thread who have tried this combo and have times for it.

Thanks

Michael R 1974 said:

Interesting. If you try it I'd be curious to know how it comes out.

Incidentally when you say the D3200 times are a bit out, I'd like to add the D100/DDX combo to the list. I've posted about this before, and tested every which way (since it is my primary combo in 35mm). And no matter what I do, the times are just way too long. In Perceptol the D100 times are pretty good for diffusion enlarging, but to get normal contrast in DDX I'm at 8 minutes versus the recommended 12 minutes!

Click to expand...

Thanks Michael for that point about D100 and DDX. The latter is my usual developer and I think I have developed a D100 film in the past and it would have been in DDX almost certainly. If it was then I'd have used Ilford times and if I did I don't think I noticed a problem.

However there are a lot of "ifs" here so I need to check. I cannot rule out that it might have been Perceptol I used. Pity that the developer doesn't imprint its name of the neg rebates

If I find that I haven't used D100 then I'll bear your findings in mind for the future. A clip test would seem to be the order of the day, given that you get good negs with a 50% reduction in time.


pentaxuser

pentaxuser said:

Wintoid never got an answerone as you will see and maybe left APUG feeling "unwanted". If he did that's a pity but strictly not my concern.

Click to expand...

I'm still here I never did try this combination. I think I assumed from the lack of response that it was probably a bad idea. Not very imaginative of me, but there you go!