Pan F+ and Xtol

If we are to be smart about this image stability issue that I have never encountered with Pan-f, it seems to me that over exposing the box speed by one stop would be a proper cure.

There is no way that double the light on film will fade away in a serious way. Doubling of light is a lot, to begin with.

Also, as a sidenote, I believe that iso 50 is already underexposing it. Pan-F is not a 50 iso film

As a second sidenote: would any film keep a good latent image of an underexposed exposure? Answer is: No.

Especially if you use a reflective meter, chances are that you are actually exposing this native iso 25 film at 100 (camera set at iso 50 and add the camera’s reflective meter natually underexposing by one stop). This is deadly for any slow film, as slow films are already extremely intolerant. Always has been the case. Look at tmax, and the various old slow speed films.

Expose Pan-f @ iso 25 with a proper incident light meter and you will never, ever, run into any kind of problem.

Beautiful film.

NB23 said:

I use my Pan-f @ iso 25 and develop in Ilfosol-3 1:14

Click to expand...

An excellent choice of developer!

shuddered said:

OP
be advised. pan f has limited latent image retention, the internet reports that after a period of time it magically vanishes. the internet also suggests xtol is a low contrast developer so with low contrast film it might be low low contrast negatives.

Click to expand...

I've never heard the internet say any of that and I have been listening. On the other hand, individuals who use the internet to communicate will occasionally offer opinions on the longevity of latent images in film. I've never heard it said that XTOL was intrinsically a low contrast developer. I suppose you could make about any developer produce lower contrast if you screw it up correctly.

Unless it's an overcast day, I shoot Pan F+ at ISO 25 and process in 510 Pyro 1+100, 8 min, 70F. Agitation for the first minute, then 10 seconds at 2 minute intervals.

So we did our shoot at Riverview in Coquitlam today with Andy and Matt there. I shot my Pan F at 25 ISO. The sun was out, but it wasn't a strong sun. The light was quite nice today. A bit softer. I developed my 2 rolls of 120 in Xtol 1:3 for 10.5 minutes and they turned out great. I'll have to scan them up to see how the contrast faired. Both Andy and I did (and are doing) some videos on Pan F+ this week, so you guys can take a look.

Too bad you couldn't get there at 8. The light was exquisite then. Advantage of living just down the road!

Yeah. 8 is a bit early for me. I'd have to get up at 6:15 to make it at that time. I wasn't unhappy with how the light was today. The contrast of the buildings with white paint, etc would have been high anyway. I think only in overcast would it be more toned down.

The light/sun was strong enough that I have my first bit of "colour" for the year!

braxus said:

Yeah. 8 is a bit early for me. I'd have to get up at 6:15 to make it at that time. I wasn't unhappy with how the light was today. The contrast of the buildings with white paint, etc would have been high anyway. I think only in overcast would it be more toned down.

Click to expand...

The sunlight at 8 was different than the sunlight when you arrived. It was more pinky yellow, and not as harsh, peeking through the cracks in the clouds. The shadows are much longer, too. The trees I like to photograph are more backlit and quite stunning.

Here are some of my pics from last Monday. This was Pan F+ shot at 25 ISO and developed in Xtol 1:3 for 10.5 minutes. Im wondering if my shutter drag issue is starting to come back, as some shots were darker on one side in a few of them.

Braxus Photography Fun: Ilford Pan F+ Film - YouTube

Posted a video last night of the scans I got off Pan F+ from recently and also in the past. Take a look. I must say Youtube compresses the tones so much in the video, it really flattens the pictures to take all the life out of them. They look so much better in the original files.