Pan F+ times in HC-110

[ntenny]

I just developed my first roll of Pan F+ in HC-110, using a time from the MDC: dilution E, 5 1/2 minutes at 20 C. Box speed. The results look thin; not totally unusable, but probably off by a stop or more, and on most frames the highlights don't really look as dense as I'd like. There are a couple of frames where the light was especially contrasty, and in those frames the densest highlights look like a good black, so I don't think the developer was incapable of getting there, but the edge markings are decidedly thin---all in all, it just looks underdeveloped.

It's always possible that I was having a bad exposure day, but the meter in that camera has always been an oracle, and that wouldn't explain the edge markings. The batch of developer has been performing fine, I'm using distilled water as usual, etc. Have others found that the MDC times are short, and does anyone have known good times for this combination---maybe with dilution H, to stretch out the time a little bit?

(If there are other developers that are OMG THE GREATEST THING EVER with this film, I'm sure people will let me know, but my current options are limited to HC-110, PC-TEA, Diafine, and Caffenol, and I'm not really interested in expanding that set at this time.)

Thanks.

-NT

 

[JW PHOTO]

I think PanF+ is just an outstanding film period! It's a little tricky in the contrast department, at least for me anyway, but I've found a couple of solutions that seem to help me with taming it a little. My two favorite developers for PanF+ are Ilford Perceptol diluted 1:3 and Rodinal diluted 1:100 semi-stand for 50 minutes with a total of two inversions, one at 20min. at the other at 40min.. With the Rodinal I do a 45 sec. series of gentle rolls and inversions then rap the tank. Works very well with taming highlights. I rate it at ISO/ASA 32. Now, I do believe it should also work very well in a diluted HC-110 also, but I've never used it. JohnW

 

[Gerald C Koch]

It's a little tricky in the contrast department, ... I rate it at ISO/ASA 32. Now, I do believe it should also work very well in a diluted HC-110 also, but I've never used it. JohnW

I agree, Pan-F+ seems to build contrast very quickly. To compensate I do as John does and overexpose it (EI 32) and reduce the recommend development times a bit. I also use a soft working developer D-23 1+1.

 

[erikg]

I rate this film at 32. I can't help you with your developers of choice but I do know this film can't tolerate under exposure, you have to meter carefully. Ignore the edge markings they are almost always very light on Pan-f.

 

[JW PHOTO]

I should have said, I've never used HC-110 on PanF+, but cut my teeth using HC-110 Dil. B with 35mm Kodak Tri-X many moons ago. Also, some here, myself included, have had latent image stability problems with PanF+ so don't let the exposed PanF+ set around very long before you process it. It's a funny film this way since I've used very old and not really properly stored PanF (before the +) and it seemed fine. Well, maybe a tad slow, but still very useable, but once exposed it doesn't seem to hold up as well. That's just my experience anyway. Still a very good film with excellent mid-tones. JohnW

 

[ntenny]

Ignore the edge markings they are almost always very light on Pan-f.

Thanks, that's very helpful to know. In that case it seems more believable that underexposure was involved.

For those downrating this film, are you using the recommended dev times for box speed? I'm trying to find something to fill the void left by Efke 25, so I don't mind the slower speed in principle.

-NT

 

[Xmas]

try 25 ISO
read the PDF datasheet
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=5
if the sun is out and you have not burnt highlights you are underexposing.

 

[NB23]

Ilfosol-3 gave me absolutely gorgeous results.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Thanks, that's very helpful to know. In that case it seems more believable that underexposure was involved.

For those downrating this film, are you using the recommended dev times for box speed? I'm trying to find something to fill the void left by Efke 25, so I don't mind the slower speed in principle.

-NT

You can use the recommended times as a starting point and you might just hit it right on the first try. When I try something new, without going through a series of test, I'll usually error on the lite side. I find that if I develop my new roll/developer about 10% less than recommended I am more apt to be close. I find it easier to build contrast by guessing then it is to start out the other way with to much contrast and try to scale back my time/agitation scheme. That's just me of course and you might find it easier the other way around. The developers you list should be fine, but I only have used one of yours with PanF+ and that's Diafine. It worked just fine, but for me it wasn't as nice as Rodinal or Perceptol. Diafine is super with Tri-X and not bad with even Fuji Acros, but is just average for some other films I tried in it. Diafine does seem to help hold the highlights, but sometimes the mid-tones look different in it. I always keep it on the shelf in the darkroom 'cause it's really nice when you need it. You just might find you like the combo Diafine/PanF+? JohnW