Shoot Ilford Panf at speed?

[Hubigpielover]

I want to try out some PanF this weekend if that pesky tropical storm gets out the way.


I've read that Panf should be shot at 25 instead of box speed? Can anyone verify?

Thanks

 

[Punker]

There's a small discussion on it here.

I find the film has limited dynamic range so I personally haven't tried shooting it at anything other than box speed.

 

[Hubigpielover]

There's a small discussion on it here.

I find the film has limited dynamic range so I personally haven't tried shooting it at anything other than box speed.

Thanks, looking forward to using it this weekend.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Why not? Film is designed to shoot a box speed.

 

[Hubigpielover]

Why not? Film is designed to shoot a box speed.

It should be but sometimes isn't.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I've found best results are at 25 or even iso 12.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It should be but sometimes isn't.

But if it is not shot at box speed there should be a reason better than "well this morning my toast looked that it has a face in it."

 

[Petraio Prime]

ASA speeds were doubled in 1960. They should have left them alone. ASA 200 speed became ASA 400. Almost every film looks better at half the rated speed, based on empirical testing.

 

[Petraio Prime]

I've found best results are at 25 or even iso 12.

Yup!

 

[Hubigpielover]

Thanks everyone. Tied 2/2 in favor of each. I have two rolls so I might just split it and call it good. After all I am testing the film.

 

[destroya]

for me, it depends on the developer. for pyro-mc, I shoot at 32. for rodinal I shoot at 25. for Beutler I shoot at 50.

 

[MattKing]

Remember, the ISO spec is designed with commercial processing - i.e. straight prints - in mind. It is also strongly rooted in "most pleasing print" criteria. And the appearance of highlights and mid-tones like Caucasian skin heavily influences people's perception of "pleasing" (at least in areas where light skinned people predominate).
Pan-f is a challenging film if you are intending to have it commercially processed, and expect straight prints from it. Less exposure may yield better straight print reproduction of highlights and light tones.
For those who are able to manipulate the highlights and light tones at time of preparing an image for presentation ("printing"), more exposure will indeed result in better shadows, while still presenting the highlights and light tones well.

 

[Hubigpielover]

for me, it depends on the developer. for pyro-mc, I shoot at 32. for rodinal I shoot at 25. for Beutler I shoot at 50.

That makes sense but I send mine off to get developed by the Darkroom. Soon oh so soon, I will have a darkroom. Well not so soon. I am buying it piecemeal.

 

[hacked - sepiareverb]

I like Pan-F at 40 and I run it in DD-X. I suspect most would say I'm being stupid, but it works for me.

 

[Hubigpielover]

Remember, the ISO spec is designed with commercial processing - i.e. straight prints - in mind. It is also strongly rooted in "most pleasing print" criteria. And the appearance of highlights and mid-tones like Caucasian skin heavily influences people's perception of "pleasing" (at least in areas where light skinned people predominate).
Pan-f is a challenging film if you are intending to have it commercially processed, and expect straight prints from it. Less exposure may yield better straight print reproduction of highlights and light tones.
For those who are able to manipulate the highlights and light tones at time of preparing an image for presentation ("printing"), more exposure will indeed result in better shadows, while still presenting the highlights and light tones well.

Great info. I had no clue about any of this. One reason I love this sight is I can get good advice and my eyes don't roll back in my head from boredom. I've got a couple of textbooks on darkrooms and such and they are as dry as dirt. Anyways, still don't have a darkroom so I send my photos off to get developed, printed and scanned.

If the storm doesn't cause to much damage (I will be traveling that road in the video), Saturday I was planning to go down and shoot two rolls each of Panf and HP4 and shoot some coastal landscape and architecture.

 

[Hubigpielover]

I like Pan-F at 40 and I run it in DD-X. I suspect most would say I'm being stupid, but it works for me.

If it works it works.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

From my single 100 ft bulk experience it is good film at any speed as long as you not pushing above 50.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Pan F Plus is a contrasty film. I over-expose a bit, say ISO 32, and develop it is D-23 1+1. You could also use Perceptol.

 

[Hubigpielover]

From my single 100 ft bulk experience it is good film at any speed as long as you not pushing above 50.

I can live with that.

Pan F Plus is a contrasty film. I over-expose a bit, say ISO 32, and develop it is D-23 1+1. You could also use Perceptol.

I don't develop yet but I am worried about sending it off to get it developed. The Darkroom has been good to me so far and the person says they have experience doing it so we will see.

 

[MattKing]

I don't develop yet but I am worried about sending it off to get it developed. The Darkroom has been good to me so far and the person says they have experience doing it so we will see.

Do you have two rolls, and can you afford to experiment a bit?
Try shooting one film at "box" speed and another at a lower speed. Try to avoid the really contrasty, wide range subjects that Pan-F isn't particularly suited to. Send both rolls off, and mark on each what Exposure Index you used. If you can, talk to your lab and get their advice - they may recommend and be able to offer a "pull" development on one or both rolls. If they charge extra for that, only you can decide whether the price is worth it to you.
When you get the results back, compare them.

 

[trendland]

I want to try out some PanF this weekend if that pesky tropical storm gets out the way.


I've read that Panf should be shot at 25 instead of box speed? Can anyone verify?

Thanks

You have heard it in a right way !
It is a very good choise to use PanF at EI. ISO25/15Din.
A lot of people (me too) would use PanF
particular in this way.
Or let me exaggerate it a bit more :
The only reason to use PanF today - because there a more and more other
bw emulsions of modern type wich very
proper charactaristics (Delta100) when you are looking to Ilford Films - is with this special E.I.
(wow ......a big firestorm ..is posible comming soon )
But notice : This is exact in concern to a recomended developer combination.
ILFORD PAN F / ILFORD PERCEPTOL
because when you uses Perceptol you have a lost of 1 stop (with all films - by the way)
So in this combination you will absolute need E.I. 25/15Din.
Remember Ilford Perceptol/PanF
(Strongly Recomended )

with regards

 

[Hubigpielover]

Do you have two rolls, and can you afford to experiment a bit?
Try shooting one film at "box" speed and another at a lower speed. Try to avoid the really contrasty, wide range subjects that Pan-F isn't particularly suited to. Send both rolls off, and mark on each what Exposure Index you used. If you can, talk to your lab and get their advice - they may recommend and be able to offer a "pull" development on one or both rolls. If they charge extra for that, only you can decide whether the price is worth it to you.
When you get the results back, compare them.

I can experiment and was thinking of doing just that. TBH, I am just being frugal because I need to start buying darkroom stuff to shoot more film. Before I lost a good paying job, I did a lot of experimenting with the Efke film (which is what I am trying to replace) that I had making sure to jot done all the info to consult later. The whole point of this is to test HP4 and PanF to see which I should use when and where. Same with what I did with Foma 100. I learned that the best pictures out of that roll weren't the ones in bright sunlight. I know it now that it won't be my primary film. Should I treat Pan F the same way?

Thanks Matt

 

[Hubigpielover]

T

Ilford Perceptol

Thanks for the info.

 

[Petraio Prime]

Honestly, Pan F Plus is not a good choice for an all-around film. It's too slow, and very tricky to develop. Fuji Acros is about a stop faster (50-64 vs 25-32 in most developers) and just as fine-grained. Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak T-Max 100 are also good fine-grain films. I tried some Pan-F Plus about 10 years ago, and found that Acros was at least as fine-grained and easier to process.

 

[Craig75]

find a scene with deep shadows and bright highlights - bracket the shot from 100 down to 6 by changing aperture and choose iso setting that works best for your workflow