Ilford Pan F+ why do you do this ?

<p>Hi guys im having really bad problems with Ilford Pan f+ is it the film or me.<br>

1: I was new to developing and developed a roll for a friend he had sitting around for like 7 years, I developed this is Ilford lc29 after finding a few times I went ahead and tried to dev it, Turns out I was left with a completely blank roll so under developed you could make out only the lines just and I meant just between the frames.<br>

2: A friend (the guy teaching me) found some brand new chemicals at home Agfa Rodinal Special and Agfa Rodinal, He said I have another roll of Pan f+ you can try to develop in the rodinal special if you like not to my surprise there was nothing on the film. Turns out these chemicals were bad and the couple of rolls I did come out blank.<br>

3: So for about the last 3 months ive been using the original unopened agfa rodinal with perfect results no matter what film I have used hp5, fp4, apx, tri-x, tmax, deltas and so on. I've found my films of choice HP5 and FP4 by using a few types and narrowing it down, everything I have developed has been fine. So a friend gave me a roll of pan f+ (which I was reluctant to use because of the other 2 times) it was quite old and out of date but never opened I shot it finally developed in in rodinal 1:50 dilution so to give it more time than my usual 1:25 dilution and did exactly what Id do to every other roll I have processed. So after my wash I hang it up in awe that I have what looks like 36 good exposures, so off home I go to only come back the next day to realise the negs look fine but then it dawns on me there is no film info there to see as in another under development but I have 36 good looking exposures.</p>

<p>What? Why? How? Is this a film that should not be used when not fresh? Should I have put it in the fridge after using it? I cant seem to narrow down the problems? Only number to and that’s because the chemicals were gone and didn’t develop anything, but my lc29 was brand new and the rodinal may not be new but the results it gives me on my fp4 and hp5 are great.</p>

<p>First takeaway from this experience: <em>always proof your developer before you develop a roll of film.</em> Put an inch of the leader in the cup of developer you plan to pour into the tank, and see that the film turns black in a few minutes. Any developer can go "dead" suddenly, and some of them don't change color when that happens.<br>

Pan F+ should last a long long time. There is a loss of film speed with age due to chemical degradation, which is faster the warmer the film is. You also gain base fog due to cosmic rays, there's nothing you can do about that. (A lead film bag isn't enough lead. Takes tons of lead. That's why Kodak stores master rolls of film in salt mines.) These decay processes are very slow on slower film (like Pan F+), and faster with faster films.<br>

Your roll may be a quality control fluke with no frame number exposure. Or could the design of your developing tank be keeping the developer from getting to that part of the film? Look with a loupe, perhaps the data is there, but faint.</p>

<p>Hi John<br>

Its not the developer. I developed a perfect roll of hp5 before it cleaned everything got a dud pan f+ and after that a perfect roll of Apx so its not my tank or my chemicals it seems to be the film the info is there but i just cant understand how it can be so faint as in you can just make it out but my shots are there.</p>

<p>Im yet to do a contact sheet or scans of the negs. But yeah ill buy a brand new roll shoot it develop it and see how i go then ill be able to tell if its the film</p>

<p>I understant the other 2 rolls i mentioned were prob down to developer lc29 is not reccomended i found out after and then the agfa rodinal special was dud as I tried a couple of rolls in it, but the rodinal is amazing and giving me perfect results every time except on pan f again.</p>

<p>I have a bulk roll of film that seems comparable to what Paul described. Reportedly it's Pan F+, obtained through another source, possibly a house marque or third party distributor. Anyway, it behaves like Pan F+ but has almost no edge markings and those it does have are barely visible. It could very well be an Eastern European film in the approximate range of ISO 50, no way of knowing without clear markings.</p>

<p>Edge markings aren't a reliable gauge anyway. They don't tell us anything useful about the condition of the film or developer.</p>

<p>The best results I got with that mystery bulk roll were with Diafine, since development time isn't a factor and it's fairly generous about under and over exposure.</p>

<p>Lex, Faint edge markings seem to be normal for Pan F. I used it quite often in the 1980s and the faint edge markings were just the the same then as on a Pan F I processed just a few weeks ago. All other Ilford films have good edge markings, no idea why Pan F should be different.</p>