Neopan 1600@800

[brian304]

I just shot some Neopan 1600 at 800 and developed it in HC110B for 5 minutes, as per the

Fuji website. In the shots taken inside the grain is really thick, the outdoor shots appear

to have much less grain. All shots were with a Leica M7 mostly on AE. Is Neopan 1600

not very sensitive with tungsten. I shot some Neopan 400 and developed in d76 and the

results were grain free beautiful blacks and contrast while shooting indoors.

Is there a better way to get to ISO 800 or 1600. This is my second attempt with Neopan

1600 and I got the same grainy results.

thanks

Brian

[ben_crabtree]

I have had very good luck with Neopan 1600 @ 800, developed in X-tol 1:2. Sharp, surprisingly little grain on indoor shots (I don't use it much outdoors, don't need the speed).

[johnmarkpainter]

I always shoot it @ 1000 and develop in XTol or D76. It is going to have grain, but to me

it has always seemed a lot more "solid" of an image than Delta 3200.

 

You might have overexposed it too much? I don't trust AE in low lighting. COme to think

of it....I don't trust AE :)

 

jmp

[r._odinal]

As implied in the previous post, I'd suggest looking into your metering. Any scene with varying amounts of light and shadows (hmmm... sounds like everything) can fool a meter, but especially dim or sparsely lit situations. It's easy for your meter to over or under compensate for dark areas or bright lights that happen to be around. Try and meter off of a mid-tone or read a key-tone and adjust.

[lex_jenkins]

Grain is much more apparent in large expanses of upper midtones, such as skies, etc. Compare all of your photos closely under bright light, preferably sunlight. I'll bet you'll see grain in the darker tones as well, it just won't be easy to spot.

 

As for grain in general, hey, you shoot ultra fast film, you gotta accept some compromises, especially in grain. I actually get finer grain from TMY pushed to 1600 than Delta 3200 at 1600. But the tradeoff is the pushed TMY has little, if any, shadow detail while it's good in the Delta 3200. And midtone smoothness is better with the pushed TMY.

 

That's why I think it sometimes makes better sense to push a moderately high speed film than use an ultra fast film. Just a matter of taste.

 

If D76 doesn't do it for you with Neopan 1600 at any speed I'll make my usual suggestion - Microphen. There are other speed enhancing developers reportedly capable of keeping grain under control - Acufine, DDX, others - I just haven't used 'em all. I found one that works for me so I stick with it.

[brian304]

I will try some of these ideas. I think the AE is ok. I guess I was afraid that the HC110 did

me in with respect to the grain. I understand I will get grain, that is fine. I just didn't

think it would be so large.

thanks again

Brian

[john_stockdale2]

Are the negs shot inside of different density to those taken outside? A difference would then suggest metering. Microphen will get you closer to what you're looking for, but 1600 is getting into very low shadow detail territory for this film.

[avisualemotion]

I did little shots with Neopan 1600@800 and did different over and under exposures. It is nothing special, just to see how highlights and shadows are effected with different exposure when developed same way. You can take a look on my <a href="http://piskoftak.com/last_roll.phtml">last rool page</a> where you can see some 2700dpi scans and some text. Please understand that development time was just guess, so that is not best you can do with that film/developer combination.<br>

<br>

---<br>

Richard Vanek<br>

<a href="http://piskoftak.com/">http://piskoftak.com/</a>

[kunihiko]

I've little experienced with NEOPAN 400 & 1600, both at EI3200,1600,800.<BR>

I prefer NEOPAN 1600 for EI3200 & EI1600, NEOPAN 400 for EI800.<BR>

<A href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2146359&size=lg">This one in my PN page is NEOPAN 1600 @1600 developed in Pyrocat-HD</A><BR>

I'm not sure that your browser is OK with Japanese Language pages, but I have some photos in my web site.<BR>

<A href="http://www.tokyo-photo.net/film/image02/spr009.html">NEOPAN 1600 @ 800</A><BR>

<A href="http://www.tokyo-photo.net/film/image02/pr011.html">NEOPAN 400 @ 800</A><BR>

* FUJIDOL E is a Fuji's developer. I guess it's like XTOL (not sure).

[john_stockdale2]

For those who are interested in the Fujidol E referred to in the above post, Ryuji Suzuki has offered the following guess as to its nature:

 

"Fujidol E is a standard fine grain developer supplied in dry powder package. This developer uses isoascorbic acid. Mildly alkaline solution pH is maintained by sodium sulfite with addition of a very small amount of sodium metabisulfite. No buffering agent is listed in the MSDS, so small amounts of carbonate, phosphate, borates, etc. are possible. Also, this developer is likely to contain phenidone or its derivative as a nucleating agent, and possibly potassium bromide."

[brian304]

Those Neopan 400 @800 are great. I took a loupe to some older Neopan 1600 shots and

the grain and detail under the same lighting appear equal. I guess pulling Neopan 1600 is

just not worth it using my current developers, D76 and HC110.

I am going to shoot more Neopan 400 and use it at 800 too. Thanks for posting those

shots.

Brian