Why do Shanghai pan films take so long?

[RLangham]

I have used Shanghai Pan GP3 100 in both 4x5 and 120 and for both the Dektol times are rather long. I have seen it recommended to do a 4:1 dilution for fourteen minutes, and I used to have success doing 3:1 at 8 and 10 minutes. That’s oddly long. 3:1 Dektol can develop some films in three and a half minutes and 7:1 usually takes only six and a half to seven minutes. Why does this (admittedly basic) film take so long?

 

[Rick A]

What's your hurry? Why rush development? I use PMK for Shanghai GP3, somewhere around 10 minutes(my notebook is packed away along with my entire darkroom). I prefer longish developing times, timing is less critical, less chance of uneven development.

 

[BrianShaw]

LOL... I’ve wondered the same but appreciate the additional time because it allows for some relaxation and meditation.

 

[MattKing]

Modern films may very well be designed toward a fairly short development time.
In the commercial processing world, a 14 minute developing time is relatively expensive.
If the Shanghai films use older technology, they might not develop quickly.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I use this film in sheet sizes. I haven't noticed excessive development times. I would if it were 3 min, though! That's crazy short!

 

[Huss]

Shanghai GP3 400 220 develops with normal times using DF96 monobath.

 

[RLangham]

What's your hurry? Why rush development? I use PMK for Shanghai GP3, somewhere around 10 minutes(my notebook is packed away along with my entire darkroom). I prefer longish developing times, timing is less critical, less chance of uneven development.

I prefer moderate development times, with the same advantage to some extent, but with the additional advantage of spending less time shaking a tank, not touching my face, watching a stopwatch.
Developing is not relaxing to me— I develop so I can shoot, not vice versa.

 

[RLangham]

I use this film in sheet sizes. I haven't noticed excessive development times. I would if it were 3 min, though! That's crazy short!

Dektol is very strong and 3:1 is a very strong solution of it. TMX can come out too thick from 3:00 in 3:1 Dektol.

 

[otto.f]

What's your hurry? Why rush development? I use PMK for Shanghai GP3, somewhere around 10 minutes(my notebook is packed away along with my entire darkroom). I prefer longish developing times, timing is less critical, less chance of uneven development.

+1, everything below 7’ is risky for all kinds of errors which can hardly be known afterwards. 10’ is a nice time I think, but a little warmer can get you to 7’

 

[Rick A]

I prefer moderate development times, with the same advantage to some extent, but with the additional advantage of spending less time shaking a tank, not touching my face, watching a stopwatch.
Developing is not relaxing to me— I develop so I can shoot, not vice versa.

So why even bother with film? If you merely only enjoy shooting use a digisnapper and skip processing altogether. Development is an important step in the total experience, and shouldn't be viewed as a "necessary evil", short cutting this step results in less than satisfying outcomes. Dektol(D-72) is a paper developer that, decades ago, newspapers used in the press rooms to rush photos to meet deadlines, they didn't give one thought to long scale tonal separations..

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Dektol is very strong and 3:1 is a very strong solution of it. TMX can come out too thick from 3:00 in 3:1 Dektol.

I used to use Dektol at higher dilution to make unsharp masks. Can't remember the actual dilution but it was about 1+5 . Time was 2:00. I never considered using Dektol to develop film to completion though although my students do use Ilford MG at 1+60 with great results... All for the sake of economy!

 

[RLangham]

I used to use Dektol at higher dilution to make unsharp masks. Can't remember the actual dilution but it was about 1+5 . Time was 2:00. I never considered using Dektol to develop film to completion though although my students do use Ilford MG at 1+60 with great results... All for the sake of economy!

Dektol suits my style of photography—it’s a touch contrasty and rather grainy. With Fomapan 100 or 200 it gives a very mid-century tabloid or magazine feel—oddly candid and trashy. I love it.

 

[RLangham]

So why even bother with film? If you merely only enjoy shooting use a digisnapper and skip processing altogether. Development is an important step in the total experience, and shouldn't be viewed as a "necessary evil", short cutting this step results in less than satisfying outcomes. Dektol(D-72) is a paper developer that, decades ago, newspapers used in the press rooms to rush photos to meet deadlines, they didn't give one thought to long scale tonal separations..

Because I like the feel and look of film and frankly I find suggestions like this a little irritating. Clearly I’m pretty devoted to film if I’m still going to the expensive of doing it.

And I never said I hate developing, just that it’s not a relaxing process for me.

As for Dektol, I like the contrast and grain and the association with hack PJ’s. It has a nice look to me. It’s not by far the only one I use... I have D-76 right now too, eg.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Dektol suits my style of photography—it’s a touch contrasty and rather grainy. With Fomapan 100 or 200 it gives a very mid-century tabloid or magazine feel—oddly candid and trashy. I love it.

That's great to hear! Do you have some of your work posted so I can have a look? Thanks!

 

[RLangham]

That's great to hear! Do you have some of your work posted so I can have a look? Thanks!

Yeah, there’s some on here. Most of the B/W I’ve posted is Dektol on Foma 200.

 

[Alex Vergara]

Shanghai GP3 400 220 develops with normal times using DF96 monobath.

Hi! I have been looking EVERYWHERE for someone, anyone, to mention their gp3 film developing times with cinestill's df96 monobath!
Would you mind letting us know the times/processes you've used successfully? It would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!

 

[Bikerider]

Perhaps it is due to the emulsion being a quite old formula and a little bit thicker than what we are used to. Ilford had the Pan F and FP3 in the 1960's both were rated the same speed as the current FP4+ and Pan F+ but times for the old films, development took longer than the current films and with a developer called Ilford Hyfin the time for both films was 18 mins. For what it's worth, I still rate Hyfin as an acutance developer with better performance than Rodinal. I wish Ilford would bring it back onto the market. It was sold as a powder in boxes of seperate packets each making 500cc but the keeping qualities, once mixed was less than a day.