Pan F and Rodi. This sound like a plan?

Flotsam · Feb 20, 2005

I really like Pan F but I have always had trouble getting decent shadows with good tonal seperation.
I've been thinking of trying out Rodinal at 1:100 with gentle agitation once a minute. I'm hoping that the high dilution long rests will have a compensating effect, allowing the thin areas to build while losing activity in the denser areas.

Anybody done this or have any comments?

Tom Hoskinson · Feb 20, 2005

Flotsam said:
I really like Pan F but I have always had trouble getting decent shadows with good tonal seperation.
I've been thinking of trying out Rodinal at 1:100 with gentle agitation once a minute. I'm hoping that the high dilution long rests will have a compensating effect, allowing the thin areas to build while losing activity in the denser areas.

Anybody done this or have any comments?

Hi Neal,

I've done both Pan F and Pan F Plus in Rodinal 1:100 and 1:50 with good results. My rollfilm tank agitation scheme is 5 gentle torus inversions per minute with both dilutions. I personally prefer the 1:50 dilution (the maximum density is a little higher).

Be sure to expose for the shadows!

Dr.Kollig · Feb 20, 2005

I looked up an info sheet of Agfa (Australia?) and it lists Pan F+, 20 min 1:100, 25 ASA, gamma 0.6. 1:50 should give you 50 ASA, gamma 0.65 at 11 mins.

What I did was HP5+ 40 mins 1:100 at 400 ASA and 60 mins at 800 ASA, because contrast would not go up to more than 0.6-0.65, while shadows would gain some density.

How about considering XR-1, a low contrast speed gaining developer? (www.unblinkingeye.com for formula from patent)

Wolfram

Ronald Moravec · Feb 20, 2005

Nice combination. Don`t worry about gentle agitation. Infact you need to replace the used developer with fresh. It`s the rest time that is important.

Some find the slower films contrasty, and there doesn`t seem much you can do about it.

photomc · Feb 20, 2005

Hi Neal, have not tried it with PanF but FP4+ , EI 64 in Rodinal 1+100 gives me nice results using stand development. I usually go for 1 min of agitation then let the darn thing sit for 40 minutes at 70F. Seems the developer is pretty well spent by then, but it does give nice results. BTW, use 10 ml of Rodinal to 1L of water just to make get enough developer conc. in there...unless using trays then it is 14 ml to 1.4L.

Let us know how it works out for you...and good luck.

Flotsam · Feb 20, 2005

Thanks everyone for the responses. Lots of good advice and info.

I am going to be doing 35mm. One roll in a 250ml tank, Two in 500ml. You think that 2.5 ml of concentrate will have the poop to do an averagely exposed 36 exp roll?

I'm really trying to get better, printable tone-separation in the shadow areas. Like you can get with Tri X. I've been fooling around with some of the slower Efke films and they are quite impressive in this respect but I've got quite a bit of Pan F on hand to play with, I've goten many wonderful prints out of it over the years and I want to see if I can improve my results with it.

I don't do densitometry but I will post my impressions and results after I try it.

Thanks again.

BWGirl · Feb 20, 2005

Hi Neal!
I love Pan f+! I use the 35mm (haven't developed the 120 yet). Here's what I use:
Rodinal 1:50 for 11 minutes. I use the same agitation scheme as Tom...5 gentle toroidal inversions per minute. (I also "wonk" it on the counter after each agitation & when I first pour in the soup.)

BruceN · Feb 20, 2005

BWGirl said:
Hi Neal!
I love Pan f+! I use the 35mm (haven't developed the 120 yet). Here's what I use:
Rodinal 1:50 for 11 minutes. I use the same agitation scheme as Tom...5 gentle toroidal inversions per minute. (I also "wonk" it on the counter after each agitation & when I first pour in the soup.)

That's exactly how I get my best results, although I've been meaning to test the 1:200/90 minute stand development process that was discussed under another thread. Apparently it works quite well for high-contrast midday shots.

Bruce

david b · Feb 21, 2005

Pan F+ and Rodinal 1+50 is my favorite too.

Flotsam · Feb 21, 2005

I've used Pan 1:50 a few times, I'm interested see if 1:100 improves my shadows.

What are you guys, (you're one of the guys, Jeanette ) rating your Pan F at?

modafoto · Feb 21, 2005

I can only double what has been said. I have done a lot of Pan F+ in Hot Rod 1+50 for 11 minutes...and I love it!

titrisol · Feb 21, 2005

Haven;t used PanF but from my experience with AGFA and EFKE 25 I believe that agitation should be once every 2-3 minutes with R1+100
If you agitate every minute, your contrast will be higher than lettng it rest for a few min.

Flotsam said:
I've used Pan 1:50 a few times, I'm interested see if 1:100 improves my shadows.

What are you guys, (you're one of the guys, Jeanette ) rating your Pan F at?

RAP · Feb 21, 2005

Pan F is a slow film with a high threshold of exposure, so in order to get good shadow detail, you need to rate it slower then what's stated. I rate Pan F at ASA 25. But I use PMK mostly for all my b&w films now. I would also try Ilford's DDX.

Run a few tests to determine development times. Then just go take pictures.

BWGirl · Feb 21, 2005

Flotsam said:
I've used Pan 1:50 a few times, I'm interested see if 1:100 improves my shadows.

What are you guys, (you're one of the guys, Jeanette ) rating your Pan F at?

I feel the love! I use it straight out of the box...@ ISO 50.

Thomas Bertilsson · Feb 21, 2005

I've used Pan-F+ exposed at EI25 quite a few times, and am getting good results that way. Overexposure could be what the doctor would order in your case, since it brings out the shadows a bit.
Rodinal, especially at high dilutions usually means a little loss in film speed. In high dilutions be sure to use enough developer as well, so you don't exhaust it.
I like the idea of stand development, but have never tried it. Please let us know how it went!

- Thom

dancqu · Feb 22, 2005

"... torus inversions ..." ?

jcausey · Feb 22, 2005

I love Pan F+ in Rodinal. I haven't even tried it in other developers yet.

BWGirl · Feb 22, 2005

dancqu said:
"... torus inversions ..." ?

Well....I guess the way I do it is more like a twisted version of the "infinity" symbol... but since a torus is basically a donut...I guess "toroidal" is a bit off for my method. Mine's more like a double helix...must be a "Jeanette-ic" thing! haha

Flotsam · Feb 22, 2005

BWGirl said:
Well....I guess the way I do it is more like a twisted version of the "infinity" symbol... but since a torus is basically a donut...I guess "toroidal" is a bit off for my method. Mine's more like a double helix...must be a "Jeanette-ic" thing! haha

Sounds like I'd sprain something. I'd better continue practicing "safe" agitation techniques.

davet · Feb 23, 2005

Even at 1:100, Rodinal isn't the best choice for good speed, though I agree that in general Rodinal/Pan F is an excellent combination. You might also consider XTOL 1:3 or (my favorite) Ilfosol S 1:14, both at EI 50. Ilfosol is strange, not so good with fast films, quite good with FP4+, brilliant with Pan F+. And Pan F+ is capable of such lovely lush shadow detail ...

Flotsam · Feb 23, 2005

My thinking is that a highly diluted devoper will tend to exhaust in the denser areas during the rests while the shadows continue to develop, lowering contrast in a way that just cutting back on the overall developing time wouldn't accomplish. I assume that dropping the speed of the film will also be neccessary.

titrisol · Feb 24, 2005

I prefer to achieve what Flotsam says by making agitation less frequent.
By diluting the developer you get similar results in longer times (IMHO). How little developer is necessary to develop a roll of film it's an open-ended question to which I had never received a satisfactory answer.

Flotsam · Feb 24, 2005

I am certainthat I have seen a "minimum amount of Rodinal concentrate per roll" somewhere but I have forgotten where and what it was

modafoto · Feb 24, 2005

Flotsam said:
I am certain that I have seen a "minimum amount of Rodinal concentrate per roll" somewhere but I have forgotten where and what it was

I have, too. Can remember it either...I don't believe in it either. I think it is something Agfa said to have us use more Rodinal.
Of course it can be said that if you use a too little amount of Rodinal for a roll that the result will be of a poorer quality and 1+50 is the highest dilution recommended, but that is up to the photographer.
If you do 1+300 stand dev with Rodinal and like it...then 1+300 is ok.

Morten

titrisol · Feb 24, 2005

I have used 1+200 rodinal a few times, when I guessstmated exposures. 2 hours in standing development does the trick. However I have always used 2ml rodinal +400 water (35mm) or 3ml r+600 water (120)

I understand that the maximum gamma attainable will not be 0.65 or so but it doesn;t bug me, as I get pefectly printable negatives.

Pan F and Rodi. This sound like a plan?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency