Shanghai GP3 100 220 - still an unfinished product?

[Agulliver]

@Huss, thanks for your efforts. They are much appreciated.

All I can add is that I've been using recent GP3 100 in 127 format and haven't experienced any of these issues using a more standard dev/fix/wash/dry method. While I still don't quite see how the monobath could do this...I think we need to exclude it by trying more standard methods. Thank you for "taking one for the team".

 

[Henning Serger]

I'm taking one for the team. Next roll at the local lab.

Huss, thank you very much for all your work and sharing your results with us. Much appreciated!

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Kino]

Yes, thanks Huss. All very interesting and informative.

 

[Darko Kamer]

I'm surprised no-one from the manufacturer, distributor etc (those that make money from this product) has reached out.... Or perhaps that do not read Apug or other places where their customers congregate.

 

[faberryman]

If Shanghai is using the same film for 120 and 220, which seems like a fair assumption, the same problem should be showing up in 120, unless the problem results from the manner in which the 220 backing paper is being, for lack of a better word, installed. Has anyone experienced the same problem with Shanghai 120 film?

 

[destroya]

I'm still interested in seeing how it reacts to a development regime where you aren't mixing developer and fixer in the same tank at the same time.

Shanghai GP3 220 roll quick review

 

[Huss]

ok, the mighty GW690III is loaded once more.. One thing it really has made me appreciate how good that camera is!

 

[Huss]

Shanghai GP3 220 roll quick review

Yep, that's why I'm going to try it with a regular development process. Interesting though that the only other film that I've used that does not play nice with monobath is Silberra Orto. Everything from Kodak, Ilford, Foma, Arista, Fuji has been fine.

 

[MattKing]

Everything from Kodak, Ilford, Foma, Arista, Fuji

Has the benefit of modern pre-hardening.
Although Foma and the Foma manufactured Arista matbe a little less.

 

[AgX]

I'm surprised no-one from the manufacturer, distributor etc (those that make money from this product) has reached out.... Or perhaps that do not read Apug or other places where their customers congregate.

The representative of Shanghai Jiancheng Technology, the manufacturer of this film, has extensively posted at the thread were this conversion was presented.

And with all respect to Huss and its effort, I myself may have not reacted yet, until the test has become more clear. A monobath developer as such seems a very odd developer to me. The scratches though are another issue.
Also I wondered why he started a new thread on this. We shall see.

 

[Huss]

.. A monobath developer as such seems a very odd developer to me. ...

How so "odd"? It is extremely popular now and my local shops sell out of it continuously. As it is popular there is a good chance it will be used.

 

[Huss]

Well, film dropped off at the local shop. Will get it back in a few days then we'll see. I'm really hoping that it is fine and just not compatible with DF96, because we 'need' a supply of 220! At least my GW690 does!

 

[AnselMortensen]

Same here.
I shot a roll last weekend, and sent it to my local lab.
They use F-76, dip & dunk.
I should have negs & scans next week.
Fingers crossed.
I backed up the images I took on XP-2 Super, just in case there are any issues.

 

[Huss]

Ok. So my film is back. Result? This is a wonderful film with gorgeous tones that SHOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED IN MONOBATH!
Highly recommended, congratulations Shanghai!

This pic was taken with no filters. Did not need any to pick up the details on a cloudy day. What you are seeing is the remnants of a tsunami coming ashore, from the underground volcanic blast off the coast of Tonga.

 

[Huss]

 

[John Wiegerink]

Nice shots Huss. What a difference a second chance makes. JohnW

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

Congratz Huss and thanks for the info. Since I have a few cameras that takme 220 (some TLR, Bronica TLR and Mamiya RB67) I will pick some for my next trip.

Regards

Marcelo

 

[Huss]

Glad you like the results! It was worth it for me to waste 2 rolls to figure out what works!

Fuji GW690III, Shanghai GP3 100 220.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Huss, good work. Thank you. Now you can shoot more Shanghai film to learn its features and limitations.

 

[MattKing]

SHOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED IN MONOBATH!

Isn't curiosity wonderful?

 

[Huss]

Isn't curiosity wonderful?

It is indeed! And much better to find out with test rolls, than shooting a project and then ruining it!

I think Shanghai should note that on their packaging, or at least provide a list of recommended developers.

 

[MattKing]

I think in days gone by the customer service people at Kodak or any of the other "big" film companies would have responded to your having problems with a monobath with a response akin to "what do you expect from a monobath?"
It is sort of an "off label" use.
For those who use more standard developing techniques, I think that your very helpful experience should serve as a warning that the Shanghai GP3 film isn't as hardened as most others are.

 

[AnselMortensen]

I got my scans back from the lab, and I'm really happy.
Negs haven't yet arrived by snail mail, so I can't comment on scratches, but there appears to be one at bottom left.
Shanghai 100, 220. Lab processed in D-76.

 

[faberryman]

I got my scans back from the lab, and I'm really happy.
Negs haven't yet arrived by snail mail, so I can't comment on scratches, but there appears to be one at bottom left.
Shanghai 100, 220. Lab processed in D-76.

I see the scratch. You can easily fix that in PS.

 

[AnselMortensen]

I see the scratch. You can easily fix that in PS.

True.
However, I am a (mostly) analog printer.
The main premise of this thread is QC of Shanghai 220 film, so this was presented for objectivity purposes.
I look forward to receiving the actual negatives for closer inspection...the scans are probably not the whole story.