Lex (perpendicularity consultant) Jenkinsing Pan F

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by tim o'brien, Jun 19, 2003.

  1. I have always liked the grain structure of Pan F, the mid tonalities,
    and shadow details, but... I have always had issues controlling the
    highlight blocking.


    So... last night, I made a 500ml soup of 1+250 Rodinal, put a roll of
    120 Pan F (shot at rated speed and +1 ) in the steel tank, agitated
    the film for 30 seconds, then went to watch some art flick my
    Significant Other picked out. Two hours later came back to finish
    processing the film.

    Amazing! No blown out highlights, incredable midtone values and the
    shadows are perfect. It looks like the line detail could cut you like
    a knife.

    Pictures printed this weekend. Thanks for the idea and starting point
    Lex.

    tim
     
  2. Tim...I found I had bromide drag without 1 complete gentle inversion of the can every 30 minutes (120 PanF @50 in 70 degree Rodinal 1+300--5mls Rodinal to 1500 mls H2O, two hours). Did you have any?
     
  3. Bromide Drag, eh? Sounds like a drag.
    I read up on this phenominum and I must say I'll have to put these in the enlarger tonight and look for it. If it's there, it's not apparent looking at the negs on a light table.
    I wonder if, because there is no movement whatsoever on the surface of the negative, the development of this streak is not happening.

    When I examine the negative more closely, I'll look for abnormal lack of development on the edges of highlights. From my house, it just looks sharp.

    tim
     
  4. If your looking for something with nice highlights and mid-tones, you should consider PMK Pyro. Great highlights and tones. Also a little faster than 2 hour development.
     
  5. Now that was funny!! LOL
     
  6. So far I haven't detected any evidence of streaking due to bromide drag in stand development with Rodinal.

    However I did have problems with uneven film edge development using plastic reels due to the higher flanges so I switched to stainless reels for stand development.

    As for convenience, that isn't really a factor. I do it for a particular "look." With Tri-X, for example, I'm after a particular flavor of coarse but evenly distributed grain that's consistent across highlights, midtones and shadows.

    Right now I have a test roll of Tri-X at EI 200 going on 15 hours in an extremely dilute Rodinal/Ilfosol-S solution with a pinch of borax tossed in.
     
  7. to paraphrase Buzz Lightyear-

    "to gamma infinity and beyond"

    somewhere there old Billy Mortensen is smiling.

    Keep us posted guys- interesting developments.
     
  8. Hey Lex -

    Fifteen hour development times....wow, it's performance art!
     
  9. Kevin, LOL!!! You got that right! I could be at the grocery store, run into a friend, they ask me what I'm doing: "Developing film."

    Hey, you oughta see the density of that set of negs. Fifteen hours is definitely too long with Rodinal at 1:500 for normal usage. However the purpose of this test was to see what'd happen if I exposed the same scene (a still life with tones ranging from black to white) over a 10 EV range. I know from previous tests using normal development the extremes of this range would be either blank or black. In this case the compensating effect made every frame printable. Not *good*, just printable, assuming you don't mind, say, 30 minute exposures.

    Still no obvious signs of bromide drag. Next time I'll try 1 ml Rodinal in a liter of water, or .5cc per 500 ml. If I'm recalling correctly Mortenson or his assistant also refrigerated the film during prolonged stand development.

    Heck, maybe I'll bury the tank, call it time capsule development.
     
  10. Kevin, LOL!!! You got that right! I could be at the grocery store, run into a friend, they ask me what I'm doing: "Developing film."

    Hey, you oughta see the density of that set of negs. Fifteen hours is definitely too long with Rodinal at 1:500 for normal usage. However the purpose of this test was to see what'd happen if I exposed the same scene (a still life with tones ranging from black to white) over a 10 EV range. I know from previous tests using normal development the extremes of this range would be either blank or black. In this case the compensating effect made every frame printable. Not *good*, just printable, assuming you don't mind, say, 30 minute exposures.

    The fog is so thick you need a lighthouse. I added about 1/8 teaspoon of borax but I don't think anything would prevent fog under such circumstances.

    Still no obvious signs of bromide drag. Next time I'll try 1 ml Rodinal in a liter of water, or .5cc per 500 ml. If I'm recalling correctly Mortenson or his assistant also refrigerated the film during prolonged stand development.

    Heck, maybe I'll bury the tank, call it time capsule development.
     
  11. Geez Lex! I heard you the first time. }:^) }:^)>
     
  12. Not bad, Lex, but have you ever considered this approach for really difficult negatives?

    Put 1 drop of rodinal in a swimming pool & mix well. Put solution into negative tank. Agitate for 1 minute. Put tank in wine cellar. Rotate 1/4 turn every 6 months. After 5 years put into stop bath. Fix normally.

    Truly vintage quality negs assured.
     
  13. I haven't abandoned the thread, but photo.net sure make a lot of login mistakes. Type out a whole response and it loses it. When will I remember to copy and paste before hitting submit?!
    No signs of bromide drag. I looked at the edges of highlighted areas and saw no evidence of developer scavanging.

    The negs look very sharp. Very defined. Very well exposed. Perhaps I just got lucky?

    Pyro is somehwere down the road, knowing me. I need to re-conquer the devils I knew before going on to bigger and better things. I am still learning my new equipment, new films, and an occasional new technique (thanks Lex). But boredom is one thing I always run from so someday, I'll invest in the stuff needed to do Pyro developing, and yes, conquer that too.

    Prints this weekend, pitchers posted early next week.

    tim
     
  14. >>Put 1 drop of rodinal in a swimming pool & mix well

    yeah right...This is called 'homeopathic development', right ? ;-)

    Carsten

    http://www.cabophoto.com/
     
  15. I think it's called gamma infinity because it takes so long to develop gamma rays have time to fog the film. ;>
     
  16. Hello All,
    <P>

    I have to ask why everyone is so obsessed with trying to use a physical developer as a compensating developer. Why not just over expose the scene in question and use a good compensating developer with minus development. I have found it works great. Micordol-X diluted 1/3 and pulled 20-30 percent will give great highlights, and plenty of shadow detail on even the contrastiest of scenes. For the most extreme (Night time) contrast situations I use PMK, and pull 10 percent. <P>
    If you guys enjoy waiting overnight for the film to develop, that is fine, I really think that the hobby is exactly what you get out of it; and I get extremely printable negatives in 12 minutes
     
  17. It's just for a particular flavor in grain and tonality, Mark. I don't think Rodinal is necessarily technically superior to the alternatives, but it is capable of delivering a unique flavor under the right circumstances. That's what I'm after.
     
  18. Mark,

    I get perfectly printable negatives in 12 minutes also. I started the thread with the reason for trying this particular method, and it worked. If I take the three proof sheets of JandC Classic 200 ASA that I took the same time as the PanF, they look great. Well exposed, nice shadows, everything that should print on a #2 paper.

    Now take the PanF sheet developed for 2 hours. Amazing luminosity. No blownout highlights like sometimes happens on PanF. A difference. One that might be accessable other ways, but it sure is fun to try something different and have it work really well.

    If I wanted negatives that printed well in 12 minutes, I'ld learn how to take photos that could be developed by the local lab and let them do it.

    I don't, I won't, and find it amazing that you would question why anyone does anything different.

    tim
     
  19. As I said, if you get something out of it, then have fun with whatever it is you are doing. Most of the time any development times over 15 minutes and I can start to feel my hair grow.

    <P>
    Mark
     
  20. i'm with mark...

    and a skinflint to not consider stand dev, then again, some folks use rodinal for everything(rolls eyes). but uh, good luck with that, really. i had an employee once who was quite fond of 'stand' developing. i called it forgetfullness.

    and fired him,

    me

    p.s. beware of wacky edge effects! you artsy fools!
     
  21. tribby;

    I did a bit of this long development times a few years ago, working with copex film. Looking for 4x5 quality from 35mm:>) Its fun to experiment but being an engineer, and having graduated from the "use a bigger hammer" school of engineering, I got a bigger camera.
     

Share This Page