Typical results from Neopan 1600?

[stacy]

Just got a roll of this back from the lab and it is very high

contrast and sharp. Is this typical of this film? Shot at 1600 and

processed by the lab- I don't know what chemicals he used.

 

Thanks!<div></div>

[veniero]

This was three years ago. Exposed at 800, developed in XTOL.

[kaiyen]

Looks like they used chemicals that don't work too well with Neopan 1600 at that EI.

 

allan

[goemon]

Neopan 1600 is usually sharp, yes--particularly for a film its speed--but mine is much more

moderate in contrast. I'm guessing that your lab did something bad.

[eric merrill]

I prefer Neopan 1600 developed in Xtol 1:3. I would suggest sticking with one of the chromagenic films unless you're processing yourself. A good lab can produce consistent results easily using C41 film. I don't trust my traditional B&W development to others.

 

<p>

Here are a couple examples of Neopan 1600 souped in Xtol 1:3. Click to see larger versions:

 

<p>

<a class='regular' href="http://www.merrillphotography.com/portrait/candid/inside/balancing_act.html"><img alt="Balancing Act" src="http://www.merrillphotography.com/canid/pics/jbm_balance_toy1_small.jpg" border='0'></a>

<a class='regular' href="http://www.merrillphotography.com/portrait/candid/inside/first_cereal.html"><img alt="First Cereal" src="http://www.merrillphotography.com/canid/pics/jbm_first_cereal2_small.jpg" border='0'></a>

 

<p>

Eric

[spider_.]

Here is Neopan 1600 in Paterson Aculux-2.

 

<img src="http://fototime.com/{72A79997-EAD3-4D9C-9378-6CAD5EB15713}/

picture.JPG">

[robert_grasing]

The lab may simply have followed Fuji's recommended developing times. The suggested times for most films give a contrast index of about .55 to .60. This is, for example, what Fuji targets for Acros, Neopan 400 and Neopan SS with their standard developing time. However, for Neopan 1600, the contrast index with the suggested developing time is very high, about .80, hence the high contrast. The developing time needs to be reduced to get a more normal contrast negative. This will, of course, cut film speed.

 

If the lab is using something like D76, I would cut the developing time to about 60% to 70% of Fuji's suggestion. Also, lower the EI to about 800 and bracket plus/minus 1/2 stop to fine tune your own EI. This film has a very short toe, so small exposure changes make a big difference in shadow detail.

[mb81]

I think that your results are pretty accurate for what to expect with this film. I Develop mine in D76 at Fuji recommended times.

 

Also, Most labs, when processing Black and White use T-Max Developer, which doesnt always work great with all films.

[chris_waller]

I have used this film in the past but prefer to rate it at 640-800 ASA. I dev in Rodinal. Grain is very evident but crisp.

[andreas_weber]

Well, I'd guess they don't process each film individually but run all films through the same soup with the same development time. Recommended times for Neopan 1600 are about 2/3 of those for most other films, so there's a good chance for Neopan 1600 to be heavily overdeveloped ...

 

Andreas

[stacy]

hmm- Ok- thanks everyone for your opinions. I'll call him today and see if he can adjust the development time and I'll start shooting it at 800.

 

Eric- your photo of the girl with "little people" on her head is hysterical. Her expression...

 

Thanks again

[feli]

In my experience Neopan1600 is very sharp, but is a little on the contrasty side. You really

need to develop it yourself in something like XTOL or DD-X to get the best results from it.

Supposedly true speed is around 640 asa.

 

I used to shoot a lot of Delta3200 @1600 and 3200asa in DD-X (now Im use Xtol). Looks a

lot like Tri-X and seems to do a better job at retaining shadow detail than Neopan.

According to many posts on this forum the true speed of Delta3200 seems to be

somewhere around 1200 asa.

[eric merrill]

There isn't a "true" speed of a conventional B&W film by itself. Depends on the developer. Depends on the dilution.

 

I shoot Neopan 1600 at 1600 and use Xtol 1:3. The pictures I posted above were from this combination.

[photo5]

I went through a 2 year commercial photography program here in Seattle and graduated in 1999. I shot a lot of Fuji 1600, I would expose it at 1000 and the developer we each had was a gallon jug of D76 which we used mainly to develop our 4x5 sheets of film, I shot Tri-X. Anyway I would also develop my Fuji 1600 with D76. We used "compensated D76" which means we would add an ounce of new D76 for each roll of film developed, or 4 sheets of 4x5. I mixed the batch in October and used it until mid-March with great results! I would develop the Fuji 1600 for 3.5 minutes with 5 seconds of agitation every 30 seconds. The results were fantastic, I felt it had a better look to it than 35mm Tri-X and of course the speed was nice. I used to buy this film in bricks of 20 rolls. I still have a few rolls left in the freezer, but now that I don't have my own developed I don't know if I'll ever shoot it again. I haven't shot black and white for more than five years now...

 

Dave

[tim_cokayne]

<p>My findings are that Neopan is a high contrast film- I developed 3 rolls taken with 2 different cameras in the same tank for 5 minutes in Ilford DD-X @1600 iso as listed on the Massive Dev Chart.<br>

There was a huge variation between the rolls- One camera had B+W 091 dark red filter on and the other was a high quality point and shoot (without a filter obviously). The film taken with the red filter was too contrasty- no tonality between the blacks & whites and looked like they'd been spewed out of a photocopier. The point and shoot images were spot, contrasty, little detail in the shadows but sharp crisp detail in the mid tones and proper highlights (not blown out) with no noise in the shadows.</p>