Fuji Neopan in ID-11

[simon_foster]

Has anyone else had problems developing Neopan (specifically 1600 ASA)

in ID-11 ? I've now done 6 films in a 1+1 solution, and every one has come out thin, with a slight sepia tone. I wondered if the dev times

in the Ilford literature were crossed between 400 & 1600, as the 400

specifies a longer time (14 min) than 1600 (10 min), the opposite of

what I would expect. I've also done a couple of 400's, and they looked a bit overdone, which tended to confirm my thoughts, but I've just done another 1600 for 14 min, with no improvement, and one in stock solution, again no better. Anybody any ideas ?, or can someone suggest an alternative dev. I'm going to try Microphen on a pushed film, but there's no time shown for this with a straight 1600.

 

<p>

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

<p>

 

Simon Foster, UK

[chris_almqvist]

I processed a Fujipan 400 exposed at 800 in Xtol diluted 1+1 the other night, and I have just made enlargements 24x30 cm. I used the times recommended by Kodak (including adjustment for low volume of developer stock per film) and I can highly recommend the film - and the combination. There was a film test in the German 'fotomagazine' 9-97 and they indicated in the resulting tables that the times given for fujipan and some developers (Rodinal and Perceptal, but not ID11) obviously were wrong. Try the times from Kodak's web page - btw the times there are longer for the 400 than for the 1600, so that is probably not the reason for your problem

[chris_almqvist]

i have now tried the neopan 1600 in xtol 1+1 and i have got the same result as you: very thin negatives. have you found the solution to the problem?

[john_lehman]

If I recall correctly, ID-11 is the same as D-76. Last night I

developed two rolls of Neopan-1600 in D-76. I followed Fuji's

recommendations (15 minutes at 68 deg; 10 minutes at 75 deg for

exposure at EI 3200; no dilution); they came out perfectly.

[alan_gibson6]

ID-11 used to be the same as D76, but has since been "improved".