Technical Pan @ 100 - 200ASA through XTOL

[Bill Burk]

Here’s the graph of the result in D-76 stock 64 minutes at 68-degrees F with “Kodak” agitation for the first 15 minutes then agitation every minute or so thereafter.

Negatives have blown out skies but good graphic effect.

I put it on light box over the 18:20 graph you can see how much difference longer development makes.

 

[Bill Burk]

Here are wet 11x14 prints on Ilford Galerie grade 2. 1/3 stop dodge in a couple places otherwise straight prints.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Fantastic work that should be of significant help to OP and others who find themselves in OP's situation! @Bill Burk: Thanks for sharing. Much appreciated. It's this kind of technical expertise and assistance that brings good reputation to this forum.

 

[Bill Burk]

Fantastic work that should be of significant help to OP and others who find themselves in OP's situation! @Bill Burk: Thanks for sharing. Much appreciated. It's this kind of technical expertise and assistance that brings good reputation to this forum.

Thanks for the kind words @Raghu Kuvempunagar!

 

[Donald Qualls]

That looks a lot like the effect I got when I tried to get EI 50 out of Fuji Super HR microfilm.

 

[grain elevator]

Looks a lot like any severely underexposed film... Lately I've found that lith printing can sometimes save the whacky tonality and get some badly needed contrast out of the toe of such negatives.

 

[DREW WILEY]

"Soot and chalk" results, as expected. ASA 12 is realistic, 25 optimistic, 50 pushing your luck, and anything above that, science fiction. Yes, there's an image, but no gradation at either the high or low end. That's a threshold exposure issue, and not just development related. What Bill's graphs show is high contrast development, which is what this film was designed for to begin with.
I used TechPan mainly for forensic photography, including sleuthing fraudulent paintings, as well as for old photo restoration and duplication projects needing extreme red sensitivity as well as high contrast and acute detail. I still have 8x10 sheets of it. But I had a friend who routinely used it for 35mm and 120 pictorial normal-contrast photography. He had extremely good lenses and good darkroom technique, but every single print had empty shadows and blanked out highlights, even with special developers.
Like many others, I tried Tech Pan for normal use a few times too, but came away quite disappointed.

 

[John Salim]

John Salim,

Have you already developed the customer's film or should I keep going? I could try an hour (I have 2/3 of this roll left and 2 more in the freezer).

When I develop for an hour, I change the agitation pattern over the course of development. I agitate "Kodak" style for the first 10 minutes, then break the pattern to an agitation every minute for the next 30 minutes or so, then agitate less often, not quite stand but just don't need to agitate that often because by this point I'm not worried about uneven development.

It might be an hour, or two or three before you get a good negative in stock XTOL from something shot at EI 200 on Tech Pan.

Update:
Well I've spoken to the client again and was now told he'd exposed the film at 400 and not 100/200 !
So I processed a clip test for 20 minutes ( at 24 degrees C ) and inspected the film under IR.
There were images present - not very dense, so continued for another 5 minutes.
That test displayed a darkish base with poor images present, so decided to run the rest at the same spec.

Final results showed the front end was darker and fogged ( ... this is additional from some light-piped fogging ), however a few inches further, the rest of the roll wasn't fogged and had very variable exposures. This was shot by an inexperienced amateur.

Incredibly, D-min is very low for a film that's been cooked, with plenty of density available ( as noticed from a totally fogged frame ).
Contrast is a little more difficult to comment on because of the relatively poor photography throughout - though I'd say it doesn't look unusually high or low.

For the record: XTOL developer ( stock solution ) replenished @ 80ml / unit and processed for 25 minutes at 24 degrees C using a Jobo CPE-2 at high speed.

Many thanks to you all for your input,
John S

 

[Jarrett]

I'm late to the conversation, but here are my results with Technical Pan and Xtol.

MG_Midget

MG_Midget2

MG_Midget3

 

[Donald Qualls]

Those look horrible. I think you should send all your remaining Tech Pan to me for disposal.

 

[Arvee]

A bit late to the party; I was given a brick of TP and have been shooting it at EI 25 and developing it in Rodinal 1:200 @ 10'/20C and getting very nice continuous tone negatives with incredible detail and generous shadow detail that print well.

 

[dynachrome]

If the user in question is looking mostly for fine grain but with easier processing then Ektar 100 or Ilford XP-2 would be two good choices. XP-2 at 200 is very nice. The sample photos look like my first attempts with the old H&W Control VTE and UTE films.. Grain was very fine but it was hit or miss. The results were either flat or too contrasty. A roll of Verichrome Pan in my Yashica Mat have very fine grain in 8X8 or 10X10 enlargements. This was in the early 1970s. In flat light I got better results with Ilford FP-4 than with Plus-X. In contrasty light both were good but the Plus-X had more sparkle. These films were much easier to work with for a full range of tones than any copy film. Panatomic-X was also very nice but slower. I also had some luck with High Contrast Copy 5069 film for continuous tone shooting but luck was the operative word. There is plenty of Tech Pan in my freezer. Maybe when the weather warms up I'lll try some again. The last time I used it, 25 was the speed I got the best results with.

 

[Carter john]

16 EI Kodak Technical Pan

Rodinal 1+150 for thirteen minutes/ 68 degrees F

Agitate with 30 seconds initial inversions, then 3 inversions at 10 minutes,7 minutes,4 minutes, and 1minute counting down. (every 3 minutes)

Regular stop, fix and hypo.

I used 5ml of Rodinal in 750ml of H2O. That gives less than the recommended 10ml of Rodinal but the negatives really look great (full tone scale).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/carte...2ApR7X-21fuGmH-21fuEVg-21fuHA6-CXcHnB-21vEuzf

 

[JPD]

16 EI Kodak Technical Pan

Rodinal 1+150 for thirteen minutes/ 68 degrees F

Agitate with 30 seconds initial inversions, then 3 inversions at 10 minutes,7 minutes,4 minutes, and 1minute counting down. (every 3 minutes)

Regular stop, fix and hypo.

I used 5ml of Rodinal in 750ml of H2O. That gives less than the recommended 10ml of Rodinal but the negatives really look great (full tone scale).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/carte...2ApR7X-21fuGmH-21fuEVg-21fuHA6-CXcHnB-21vEuzf

That looks surprisingly good, with nice shadow detail. Thank you for sharing. I have a roll or two of TP in 120 in the freezer, and, of course, Rodinal in the darkroom. Maybe the rolls will have a chance to get used now.

 

[Carter john]

JPD, I actually am sharing the work of an other photographer with a few minor changes of my own:

http://photo-analogue.blogspot.com/2012/10/kodak-technical-pan.html

 

[Murray Kelly]

Anschell and Troop have a suggestion at the back of the book that C-41 is good for 100 ASA with TechPan No blix of course. .

 

[Jarrett]

Another Tech Pan Image developed in Xtol.