Perceptol and Fuji Neopan, dev times?

[mike_s10]

Can anyone help, i've just mixed up a batch of perceptol and can only find a dev

time for Neopan 400 listed.

I have a single 120 roll of Neopan 100 I want to develop and don't want to foul

up so wondered if anyone knows the dev time for neopan 100 in perceptol.

I could mix up a batch of ID11 but don't want to before I require it, (working

on fine grain dev at the mo) and also i guess I could Google it but being lazy

and just home from work I thought i'd ask the knowledgeable on here first :)

(hey at least i'm honest about being lazy)

[discpad]

According to The Massive Dev Chart at:

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html

 

...It shows 9:00 @ 20C in stock solution. Noting that the times are the same for 35mm & 120/220, we can safely assume that 23:00 time posted for 35mm for a 1+3 dilution should be very close for 120/220 as well.

 

Keep in mind that Acros is NOT a traditional B&W film: According to David Wood

http://www.DR5.com

Acros behaves more like a C-41 film, especially in his process.

[jim_appleyard]

go here:http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html

[mjack1]

Hi Mike,

 

I used perceptol for the first time just recently with Neopan 100 and gave it 12mins 30 secs in stock. I really liked the results!

 

Mike

[mike_s10]

Thanks guys and thanks for the digitaltruth link.

Interesting re the B&W / C-41, i was led to believe that this was trad B&W, I generally use ilford FP4 and HP5 so this is a first but i'll throw it through at the recommendations and see what I get.

I'll take a look at the DR5 site too.

Again thanks for assisisting my idleness :)

[mike_s10]

Thanks for the link and I really have to say after looking at that website I quite simply on the strength of it would not trust a roll of holiday snaps to these people.

The site is dreadful, slow to load and very amatuer-ish in appearence.

Having browsed their FAQ (Facts And Questions?) link they do themselves no favours whatsoever with ludicrously overlooked typo's like

'There is defiantly nothing wrong with DR5 chromes' and in another section

'a problem we call tuff films'

Is this a company run and maintained by a group of beer swilling bleach blonde surfers wandering round the offices all day having conversations which consist mainly of the word 'dude'?

The fact i'm in the UK and as a result wouldn't use a US based company re costs for processing i'd need to see consistent proof of quality from a person I trusted before I let them near a roll of my film and that's based on hobby shooting.

[randall ellis]

I feel the need to say that in my opinion, despite any website design problems they may have, their service and quality are solid - more so than many of the remaining processing shops out there today. don't get me wrong, I certainly agree that website problems can present a less than optimal first impression, but in this case I'm inclined to think that they are spending much more time on film processing than web development...

 

- Randy

[mike_s10]

My point is, Based purely on that site and the content within and without specific recommendation would you use them, especially if they were deemed expensive?

Regardless of how professionally they process their film the website is the equivalent of their high street store front window.

If you don't like the contents and promise of what's within at a glance most will just walk away.

If you have used them and recommend them then that's all fine and this post is not a 'dig' at the company merely an honest and forthright critiscism of a poorly designed and ordered website.

[mike_s10]

Added to whihc BTW after aseveral attempts at browsing this site and waiting and waiting for pages to load I still have yet to find information regarding Neopan as per the posters who added the link.

Again not a critiscism as i'm grateful for the info, just yet another cristiscism of the site, i wouldn't have persevered this long had someone not stated they have this info on their site and shall now give up on it.

[evan_goulet]

I didn't see on the DR5 site where he actually says that Acros behaves like a C-41. <P> <B>Quoting from DR5's site:</B><BR>

NOTE: The following films are not recommended or CANNOT be run through the dr5-process:<BR>

? AGFA APX-400 {also sold as RETRO400} <Br

? APX-25<br>

? FOMAPAN-classic100 & 400 {possible but not recommended}<br>

? GIGABIT - BLUEFIRE & ADOX CMS 20 {agfa COPEX} <br>

? EFKE-400 <br>

? FUJI-ACROS100 <br>

? BERGGER FILMS {same as forte' not recommended}<br>

? FORTE FILMS {possible but not recommended}<br>

? J&C classic {forte film}<br>

? J&C-MICRO/IMAGELINK <br>

? ALL E6, ALL C-41.<br><B>End quote.</B><P>He doesn't say anywhere that I can find that Acros behaves more like a C-41 film. He just lists it, along with C-41, in films that are not compatible with their DR5 reversal process. Basically getting positives from negatives. For normal negative processing, it behaves as a black and white film.

[discpad]

Evan: The info I got on Acros from David Wood came over the phone, not on his web site, when I asked him why that film wasn't suitable in his process.

 

Mike S: Yes, the DR5 website looks like sh*t: When you deal with him, you'll realize he's not the greatest businessman in thee world. Rest assured, though: I have seen actual film from his lab both of my own and two other photographers, and all I can say the results he gets are nothing short of spectacular. [One job in particular was by noted New York photographer Lisa Fiel

http://www.LisaFiel.com last year of the King Kong premier in Times Square: The shots of the 30 foot gorilla literally jumped right through the loupe when I looked at them on the light table.]

 

One word of caution: With a few exceptions, one does NOT shoot the box speed: Either look at the Film Review page

http://www.dr5.com/Filmreview.html

for that film, or look at the price sheet page

http://www.dr5.com/speedcost.html

to get a handle on the speed range for common films...

 

Side note: David also maintains some of the cleanest soup around. In fact, to get his total lab volume up, he FINALLY added an E-6 dip & dunk line, relying on his reputation to keep it running.

[randall ellis]

Mike,

 

I see where you're comming from, but I think our difference in reaction is that I don't stop at the cover of a book when making my judgments. I don't consider outward appearance much of an indication of what you might find inside, and I always ask the man on the street before I make a move. I mean, Wal-Mart *looks* good on the surface, but it's not until you look deeper that you see their problems. DR5 likely spends all their efforts on what they do best, processing to a high degree of quality, and if they don't have the hipest website on the net, it's probably because they don't waste time on marketing when the word on the street is that they are a small shop that does top quality work.

 

- Randy

[mike_s10]

Well that may be the case Randy and that's all well and good.

However as someone who used to work in market research and team management I used to front courses in relation to the above topics.

I can tell you that it is a statistical fact that the vast majority of people worldwide 75%+ do work on the 'first impressions' principle, do you think it accidental that stores and sites that 'look' professional generate more business and especially new customers? regardless of whether joe blogs naff looking website actually does a better job.

Another interesting factor also works against this image.

2 people in every 10 on average will tell others of a good experience with a company.

9 people out of every 10 will tell people of a bad experience.

Therefore, if one customer has a bad run, (even if it's due to his / her own ignorance in exposure), they'll tell anyone who'll listen, then the circle comes around, aforementioned people see the site or store front and immediately think, no wonder, look at how unprofessional they look, if they can't even be bothered to 'look' like they know what they're doing i'm unsurprised their service is poor.

In short what i'm saying is, the store front is the image the company presents to the world, it's the 'first impression' and therefore worth spending the time and effort on, if they're really that good then why don't they pay someone to do it for them, there are very cost effective templates and it can all be done for a negligable amount these days, just think of the custom they're missing out on.