Pan F+ exposure degradation

[Athiril]

Hi all,

Going on a trip overseas for a bit, I want to shoot some Pan F+ (120), how long until exposure degradation is noticeable?

It'd be like about 2 weeks from exposure until it gets developed.

 

[ckpj99]

If your film is fresh, I don't think it will be an issue. I love traveling with Pan F+ because I'm never worried putting it through the x-ray machines. I've waited more than two weeks before developing and see no difference.

It's worth noting that I've found Pan F+ is very sensitive to agitation at least in the developer I use (HC-110). If you're worried about a loss in contrast, I would think an extra 15 seconds of agitation would make things pop.

 

[polyglot]

2 weeks is totally fine in my experience, having shot a bunch in Cambodia and then souped it about 3 weeks later on my return with no issues. It's when you leave it for many months that it starts to lose image.

 

[BMbikerider]

Pan F and X ray devices is not a problem. It only can become a problem with high ISO film and then with repeated exposure. As for degrading after exposure I have not even heard of this in UK. I can only suggest that it is when it is kept in high temperatures for an extended period that this happens, as it will with all films.

 

[gsgary]

Garry winnogrand used to leave his for 2 years or more but that was 35mm, ive left HP5 120 for 2 months

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chamaeleo]

I have never heard of this problem either in UK. In the past I have developed Pan F and other Ilford films several years after exposure, even ones kept in a camera in the tropics, without any apparent effect. Where is the original evidence on this perceived need to keep the time between exposure and development as short as possible? I would like to know because I might learn something new.

 

[hacked - sepiareverb]

I have never heard of this problem either in UK. In the past I have developed Pan F and other Ilford films several years after exposure, even ones kept in a camera in the tropics, without any apparent effect. Where is the original evidence on this perceived need to keep the time between exposure and development as short as possible? I would like to know because I might learn something new.

From (there was a url link here which no longer exists) (emphasis mine):

I promised to follow up. Allow me to sing the praises of Ilford.

I sent the bad film to Ilford for inspection. Within about two weeks, I got a detailed response via e-mail from a technician. She checked the batch number of the film and found no other complaints or anything unusual in the coating/finishing records. She found nothing unusual in my development or storage of the film. As such, her findings were inconclusive. She did admit that "latent image regression" was the one weakness of Pan F Plus, whereby films developed more than six months after exposure could potentially come out slightly faint -- but, she said, not nearly to the degree that I've experienced. Even so, she could only guess that it was an extremely rare case of this phenomenon, and, as she put it, "that you've been extremely unlucky." She and Ilford were very generous in replacing the film.

I've since had good luck, together and separately, with both Pan F Plus and Perceptol. In fact, I'm considering Perceptol (stock) as my developer of choice for Neopan 100 Acros, of which I have a lot on hand.

Thanks to Simon and to Ilford for their excellent customer service and standing behind their products.

I've seen this as well with PanF, and have lost shots to films left undeveloped for a long time. I once ran a test and shot half a roll, stored it for four months then shot the remainder. The first half was noticeably thinner upon development. A month is not the end of the world, I myself wouldn't go longer than that without adding development time.

 

[JPD]

I have a roll of Pan F+ in a Rolleicord since 2010. I took two pictures back then, and the roll has been sitting in the camera since then. I will take some test shots and then develop the film maybe this winter. Perhaps I should add 30% time in the developer?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have never heard of this problem either in UK. In the past I have developed Pan F and other Ilford films several years after exposure, even ones kept in a camera in the tropics, without any apparent effect. Where is the original evidence on this perceived need to keep the time between exposure and development as short as possible? I would like to know because I might learn something new.

it's called 'latent image stability' and it's not endless. film manufacturers have recommended to keep the time between exposure as short as possible,but stories of decade old mystry developments keep popping up too. one day we mayyet see a picture of a real neanderthal shot with an AGFA-click fromm 10,00 BC, WHO KNOWSI develop film as soon as i can ,but don't race home for it either.