Pan F+50 for high contrast street photos?

[parasko_p]

Hi all,

 

I love the tones of Ilford Pan F+ 50. I have seen this film in controlled

studio lighting situations as well as for some architectural shots and love it.

 

However, I wish to use this film for street photography for a low grain, smooth

tone effect and I hear that highlights are easily blown in contrasty sunny

situations.

 

Does anyone know how I can develop this film for good shadow rendition whilst

maintaing highlights in such contrasty, variable lighting situations?

 

I will be using Neopan 1600 plus D76 1:1 for low light photography and I am

hoping to maintain the same developer for all my films, as I am really just

recommencing B&W processing after a long period of absence.

 

Would another low speed film, such as Acros 100, Delta 100 or FP4+ be a better

option for my goals above with D76?

 

FWIW, I am shooting with 35mm (Leica) gear and my aim was to make 10x15"

(11x14") sized prints.

 

Any advice appreciated.

 

Cheers.

[willscarlett]

If you ask if another film will be better for your above goals with D76, you will get many

different opinions, altho it doesn't hurt to get those opinions. Just don't stray too far from

your original idea.

 

About Pan F+ tho, the best way to control the highlights would be to overexpose it and then

reduce the development time, known as pull processing. As for how much to overexpose and

then reduce development, I'm not sure where to begin, so hopefully someone else can help

you.

[pje]

I normally shoot Tri-X in my Leicas for street photography. Pan F+ doesn't really strike me

as a film for street photography as it is quite slow. However you may have some other ideas.

I think a good way to control the contrast is to expose Pan F+ at 100 and then process with

Diafine. Why not experiment with Acros at 200 or FP4+ at 250 and process in Diafine.

[mike dixon]

As noted just above, increase exposure and reduce development time to control for very-contrasty lighting conditions.<P>

 

I've used Pan F+ a bit for street shooting. I didn't have much trouble with "blowing" the highlights (they weren't too dense to print), but you can get negatives that have so much contrast it's hard to make a pleasing print. I had better luck using Pan F when the light was a bit flat (light overcast). For shooting in direct sun, I like FP4+ rated at EI 80 and pulled very slightly.<P>

 

Both Pan F and FP4 are easily up to the task of making great-looking 11x14 prints. You can see a bit of grain if you get really close, but it's good-looking grain (better texture than Delta 100).<P>

<a href="http://mikedixonphotography.net/carlyfido.jpg">an example of FP4+ in direct sun, shot with a Leitz 50 Summicron</a>

[spanky]

Pan F+ is my favorite film; one I use in the street more then any other film. It's slow speed is the reason why it tends to be a bit contrasty. I get ok shadow detail shooting it at iso 50 and developing in Rodinal 1+50 for nine minutes. Since I live in LA, I've got plenty of sun even if I choose to rate it at 25 as I've done recently. Pan F+ tends to build highlights up fairly fast so it's imperative that development and agitation be worked out. Below is a shot using Pan F+ rated 25 and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 9 min. Camera was a RZ67 Pro II and 50mm ULD lens. No burning or dodging was needed; it's a straight print.<div></div>

[parasko_p]

Thanks for your comments to date.

 

Mike, can I ask what developer and times you used for your FP4 shot? I do like the tonal rendition.

[mike dixon]

I used Kodak Xtol diluted 1:2. I don't remember the time offhand, but it was about 10% more than the recommended time in Kodak's Xtol data sheet for EI 125 (I usually use 20% longer times than their recommendations).

[luke_ballard]

Wow, I am really happy to see someone else that loves Panf+50 as much as I do! I love love this film, I have done a TON of street photography with it, also FP4, I love it also, if start shooting and realize I am getting a little low on light I will pop in a roll of Fp4 and all is solved. I have never had a problem with it being to slow, as long as your shooting with plenty of sun.

My best advice is the old saying of "Meter for the highlights and develop for the shadows". I usually will meter the highlights, then meter the shadows, split the two and use that as my exposure. I have also EXTENSIVLY used this film in the studio under very low light for an abstract figure study, but the model did have to really earn her moeney cause some exposures were 1:30sec, or 1min, thats pretty tough, but I have great models. I just love the very very fine grain of this film and also the strong highlights and shadows. I use D-76 Stock, or if I want to tone it down, I use it 1:1. A lot of it is metering, but you can pull it and get what you are looking for. I have taken several of my studio shots and enlarged them to 16x20 with absoulutly NO noticiable grain. So many seem to stay away from this film because they are afraid of getting blown out highlights, but if you meter properly, you won't have this problem.

Also I love Fp4, it gives you just enough sensitivity to keep working and hand shooting when the sun start going away, but you don't loose grain quality if you use a 1:1 in D-76 anduse gentle agitation. Same procecss, but instead of agitating the can 8 to 10 times for your 5 sec agitation during development, only flip the can 3 or 4 times and do it gently also. Many many books dating back to the 70's say that harder and longer agitation with D-76 builds contrast into the negs,and this is very true cause I have done testing with it to see the actual difference.

For sure keep using it, just dilute your D-76 and don't agitate as stong and meter and average the highlights and shadows. Here is an example of a Figure Study shot I did in the studio with very minimal light, about a 20sec exposure, but I actually enlarged this photo to 16x20 and it looked amazing, no visable grain at all. I shot the photo using the breast and shadows to make shapes, and if you look there are different shapes made by the shadows and the negative space.

This was Panf+50 shot as 50 and developed in stock d-76.

Luke<div></div>

[luke_ballard]

One other example of a studio shot done wiht PanF+50, a single light and about 50sec exposure.

This film is really wonderful for B&W Fine Art work and for street photography in my opinion. Some may diagree, but I really love this film for some of my Fine Art work. As far as street photography, just be careful how you compose your shots and pay really close attention to your metering.

 

Luke<div></div>

[luke_ballard]

A street photography example with PanF50+ Dev stock d-76. You can see in this one how it is right on the edge. Your highlights can go wild on you quick, but its just a matter of getting use to it then its awsome film to use! Sorry, wish I could have put all of the examples in one post, but I don't know how. Hope this gives you a little idea of how you can take PanF50+ from one extreme to the other.

 

Luke<div></div>

[gnashings]

I think PanF+'s fearsome reputation is not necessarily deserved. As long as you are aware of the potential issues (or, I would say properties) you will be ok. And it is a fine looking film - in my experience capable of strikingly varying looks depending on your intent. In the end, the only thing I have found is that for nhand held shooting a 50 speed film runs out of light really, really quickly. I think that is something that only a trip with your camera loaded with a roll of the film will adequately show - perhaps where and when you like to do your shooting it won`t be an issue. For me it always seems to be. I like the look of it in Rodinal 1+50 - but have souped it in Microphen before to get a really, really contrasty look.

[ted_wellendorf]

Beautiful film. I prefer it at 50 asa in DK-50 1:3 9 minutes.

 

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/187/478247600_6874c89192_b.jpg

[caesar_augustus]

I'd suggest Bergger for street photography

 

 

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=5291

[rodeo_joe1]

Why not use a good old-fashioned compensating development technique for controlling contrast? Works with ANY film.

 

Use a developer and water bath combo, or a split developer (Beutler type), or weaker than normal developer with little or no agitation.

 

My own preference is for a water bath technique, since it's very predictable and controllable, and can be used with practically any developer/film combo.

 

Overexposure shouldn't be necessary, since it's extended subject brightness range that's going to be your problem. Just make sure you meter 4 stops up from the lowest wanted shadow detail (or meter the shadows and knock 4 stops off the indicated exposure). The highlights will take care of themselves, and will be printable as long as you moderate the development contrast in some way.

 

In fact, just try a few percent pull of development time to start with, and if that's not enough, then think about using one of the compensating techniques I've mentioned.

[spanky]

I've always used incident readings so my prior problems with PanF+ were due to following recommended times (too long) and agitation (too much). This of course resulted in dense highlights that took me plenty of rolls to get just right. Lucky for me all my Mamiya lenses all have shutters that seem to be fairly well within speed of each other.

[aplumpton]

Marc, one of the problems with the overly long develpment times is that they are

often cited for diffusion enlargers. I use a condenser enlarger and find it best to

oversexpose slightly and under-develop by about 10 to 20%.

[lex_jenkins]

The best results I've gotten with Pan F+ was at EI 50 in Diafine. No problems with contrast or shadow detail. There are a couple of mundane sample photos in my photo.net portfolio taken on a very bright, slightly overcast day.

 

Otherwise it seems to work best at EI 25 and not overdeveloped in other common developers, including Ilfosol-S (which is a pretty good soup for ISO 100 or slower films).