Royal Pan, Ektapan, Super XX, etc.....tell me about.

[David H. Bebbington]

I remember Royal X Pan which, like Agfa Isopan Record and Ilford HPS, was a "superspeed" film with normal tonality, low to medium resolution and coarse grain. As I recall, the recommended developer for Royal X Pan was DK-20, which always produced a lot of dichroic fog for me - in Rodinal, on the other hand, Royal X Pan was a dependable grain-effect film, rather like GAF 500 in color.

Regards,

David

 

[Vaughn]

Hippie-chicks!?

Up here they are called Humboldt Honeys, and they are still around...though the younger ones tend to have that rat-nest sort of hair style rather than straight hair down to their...ahh...belts. The older ones are going gracefully gray.

Arcata, California...where the Sixties meet the sea....

Vaughn

PS...I made my first 4x5's with Royal Pan and used Super-XX a bit back in the late 7o's, early 80's. All worked fine for me. And in my Rollei I used Vericrome Pan.

 

[Deckled Edge]

Phillip Hyde turned me on to Super XX in the early '80s. It's legendary status is well deserved for all the reasons that others have mentioned. Additionally it had a thick emulsion on a very thick base, that allowed for N++ and N-- with relative ease, as well as easy retouching. Super XX and Pyro was a match made in chemistry heaven. When I go back to one of my 600+ 8x10 Super XX negatives, I can't help longing for its return, regardless of the deadly goop it was made with.

 

[herb]

Royal Pan

We used Royal Pan, not Royal X for weddings and portraits, I ran across some old Bride's portraits the other day, now over 50 years old and they look pretty good, lack of grain, etc.

Never tried the X version.

I think anybody who plans on being in film for the next 5 years or more should have two manufacturers in their film bin. No telling when the Bean Counters at Kodak pull the plug on film.

 

[MarkS]

Ektapan was meant to match the speed and contrast of color negative film- to be used alongside VPS II in the studio portrait business. The large studio that I shot for c.1980 used it in 70mm long rolls. I forgot about it after that- until about 7-8 years back I decided to try it outdoors in 4x5. My 'zone system' tests suggested that it was slow and contrasty. Which surprised me, but the negatives didn't lie. I made a couple of good photographs with it; it worked well with low-contrast subject matter, but I never bought any more when it was gone. I went back to TXP.

 

[maxbloom]

I have 150 sheets of Super XX in 4x5 a -80 freezer. I'm too scared to shoot it until I feel like I'm a better LF photographer. Not exactly something I want to practice one.