35mm Pan F+ 50 and ID-11... your experiences?

[kw]

I know there are countless combinations of film and developer

for "the best image." In my case, I've settled on 35mm Pan F+ 50

and Ilford ID-11 as recommended by Ilford. Do you have an ideal

development ratio/time that you've found working with this film and

developer combination? And since I haven't received my ID-11 in the

mail yet, I'm curious as what to experience visually. Any photo

samples of these two products are welcome.

 

I'll be using mine to [very very slowly!] shoot landscapes.

 

Thanks for your input on these two products together!

[raczoliver]

My experiences are that no matter what film or developer you use, it is always good to start with the manufacturer's recommended time. They wrote them there for a reason. If you don't like the results, you can get creative from there, but as it has been said so many times, there are zillions of variables, and a developing time that works well for someone elese might not work for you at all. You might need to sacrifice one roll, but probably you will get usable results if you develop according to the instructions.

[andre_noble4]

With all due respect Kelly, I suggest that you seriously reconsider using a conventioanl developer like ID-11 with PanF. It's going to be a pain in the you-know-what to control the contrast/highlights for printing purposes.

 

I feel there is no better developer for this film than the Pyro developers, namely Wimberly WD2D+ and Pyrocat HD.

 

In Sandy King's 'Pyorocat HD' 1:1:100, set PanF ASA at 20, Develop 6 minutes at 70F.

 

In Wimberly WD2D+ 1:1:50, set the PanF ASA at 20 again, Develop 7 minutes at 68F.

 

Both WD2D+ and Pyrocat HD are in liquid form at the Photographer's Formulary website.

[todd_schoenbaum]

I agree that you should start with the manufaturer's recommended time, but if you really want to find your personal, ideal development time you will need to run some tests (namely the Zone I test for film speed [E.I.], and the Zone VIII test for personal development time). There are so many factors involved in developing that it is next to impossible for anyone to say that any particular amount of time is the ideal for <i>you</i>. This may be more time and energy than you want to commit to, but if you are interested Fred Picker wrote a good book on the subject "The Zone VI workshop", and I also have an article on my website about how to perform the film testing procedures <a href="http://www.celluloidandsilver.com/testing.htm"> http://www.celluloidandsilver.com/testing.htm</a><p>

I currently use Pan-F in ID-11 for most of my work, although I do use the Zone System to tame highlights when needed. I mostly use this combination in subdued light and end up needing to extend (push) the development time. Many of the images in my <a href="http://www.celluloidandsilver.com/portfolios.htm"> portfolios</a> are shot with exactly this combination (albeit with 120 film), clicking on the images will bring up the technical information like film, developer and development times. <p>I dont have any experience with this film in 35mm, but I would imagine that you may have some problems with the highlights as suggested above, especially if you are making large prints, and even more so if you are using a condensor enlarger (due to the collier effect). This may not be the ideal film/developer combination for large scale landscapes (especially under full sun), though I have found it to be quite wonderful for other uses. Best of luck...<p>Todd Schoenbaum

[lee_shively]

I've used D76 which is esentially the same thing. I use it 1:1 and 1:3. I develop for approximately 20-25% less than Ilford currently recommends--I'm at work right now and don't have the exact times involved. The times I use are exactly the same as those recommended on an old Ilford data sheet I used 30 years ago. Ilford, in it's wisdom, increased the recommended times for D76/ID-11 and Microdol-X/Perceptol and turned the film into a contrast monster, especially for those of use who print on a condenser enlarger.

[francois_gauthier]

I like PanF+ at 50 ISO with ID-11, 1:2 , 11 minutes.

 

I had to guess the time because charts have 1:1 and 1:3 unlike X-tol .

 

ID-11 is a nice developper for PanF+ (50) AND HP5+ (at 200), my main B&W films.

[Dave Luttmann]

I'll second the Pan F 50 in Pyro or Pyrocat HD. Check out this months issue of View Camera (the 100th issue). It has a great article on "Stand Development". I've used this extensively for Ilford FP4 in Large Format, and Pan F in MF. Pan F relies heavily on the sharpness of your lens due to it's great resolving power. The stand development method greatly enhances edge accutance and as such, really allows Pan F to shine!

 

Once you've mastered some of the films quirks, you'll find incredible results can be had. My 24x30 from a MF Pan F neg are sharp, low grained, and have gorgeous tonality!

 

Best of luck.

[big toys are better]

The big issue here is the 35mm format, and while really fine grained films like PanF+ are the best choices for the roll film formats, the points about contrast control are painfully accurate.

 

Whatever developer you use, and for my money ID-11/D-76 and XTOL are certainly good choices, plan on learning how to control the contrast issues-- largely by your exposure choices and then the dilution of your developer and modification of your agitation protocols. I'm not sure just how well the ID-11 or XTOL will work in a stand or my semi-stand method (well diluted developer along with short agitations spaced several minutes apart), but Rodinal at 1:100 or greater will certainly work well with the PanF+. Pyro developers should work as well if that is your decision, as might a whole host of other options if your exposure and processing techniques are properly modified for the specific scenes you photograph (always the issue with 35mm and 120 ROLL films).

 

One useful tool for roll films is to carry enough camera bodies or roll film backs to allow yourself the ability to expose each roll for either a NORMAL or a +/- processing, and bracket each image to help ensure that one will fit the bill when it is scanned or enlarged. This is cheap insurance!

 

Keep in mind that the gradation of the shadows, midtones AND highlights is dependent on a variety of factors-- some by the film itself, with others including developer choice, its dilution, the agitation methodolgy plus time in the developer (under, over or straight development). Shadows will proportionally develop more when there is little development action (dilute developer and little agitation) while the opposite will happen-- the highlights overdeveloping and blocking up-- with strong developer and agitation methods).

 

Finding the happy medium for each image is what B&W silver-based photography is all about!

 

So to specifically answer your question-- try the ID-11 as a one-shot diluted at either 1:1 (finer grain + more contrast) or 1:3 (greater sharpness + nicer gradation/less contrast) and rating your film at either 20-25 (normal scenics to higher contrast scenes) or at 50-64 as flat lighting gets flatter. And I see no reason why a 1:5 dilution might not work for really contrasty lighting situations, but I've only seen that recommended for XTOL. Use gentle agitations in well diluted developer every minute or two to reduce contrast, or every 30 seconds with either dilution to enhance overall contrast and perhaps improve highlight separation a bit (just be sure to also tap the tank every time to dislodge bubbles from the film surface!). Once you get your exposure calculations and processing techniques fine-tuned, bracketing the film exposures by 1 full stop (maybe adding another one at +/- 2 stops when in doubt) should then give you a shot at having a near perfect negative every time.