Digital BW, The Print

Hi. Has anyone had experience with using the TechXactol developer 
(listed on Barry Thornton's website) with TechPan film for digital 
scanning? How does it compare with alternative methods such as the 
Technidol or Xtol developers for digital work?  Thanks in advance for 
any advice/suggestions.
Marc.

marcsien77@... wrote:

>Has anyone had experience with using the TechXactol developer
>(listed on Barry Thornton's website) with TechPan film for digital
>scanning? ...

I, too, would be most interested in the combination.  However, I must admit
I'm skeptical.  As I understand it, the developer is a 2-solution approach
that is based on a formula that is geared to sharpness and edge-enhancement.

I was once a fan of Diafine and, as such, tried some 2-solution approaches
to Tech Pan.  I found it impossible to get even development with medium
format film.  Perhaps due to its very thin emulsion, I suspect that the
first solution is as much on the surface as in the emulsion.  As such, the
metering of that solution may not be very accurate relative to thicker
films.  The surface chemicals come off and wash around in unpredictable
ways.

I also think that Tech Pan may be better controlled by a very soft
developer, as opposed to one that is geared to sharpness.  In my experience
edge enhancement goes hand-in-hand with more grain and un-evenness (with
TP).

Frankly, my Xtol approach has proved to be unreliable -- requiring testing
of each Xtol batch.  Last year I was getting great results with Xtol 1:3.
Now 1:5 is closer, but not delivering the same shadow detail and contrast
(speed).  Having to re-calibrate my system with each developer batch is not
my idea of a good time.  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed film.  We'll see.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

Neopan 100 is fantastic with Acufine.

Robert

On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 09:43  AM, Paul Roark wrote:

> marcsien77@... wrote:
>
>> Has anyone had experience with using the TechXactol developer
>> (listed on Barry Thornton's website) with TechPan film for digital
>> scanning? ...
>
> I, too, would be most interested in the combination.  However, I must  
> admit
> I'm skeptical.  As I understand it, the developer is a 2-solution  
> approach
> that is based on a formula that is geared to sharpness and  
> edge-enhancement.
>
> I was once a fan of Diafine and, as such, tried some 2-solution  
> approaches
> to Tech Pan.  I found it impossible to get even development with medium
> format film.  Perhaps due to its very thin emulsion, I suspect that the
> first solution is as much on the surface as in the emulsion.  As such,  
> the
> metering of that solution may not be very accurate relative to thicker
> films.  The surface chemicals come off and wash around in unpredictable
> ways.
>
> I also think that Tech Pan may be better controlled by a very soft
> developer, as opposed to one that is geared to sharpness.  In my  
> experience
> edge enhancement goes hand-in-hand with more grain and un-evenness  
> (with
> TP).
>
> Frankly, my Xtol approach has proved to be unreliable -- requiring  
> testing
> of each Xtol batch.  Last year I was getting great results with Xtol  
> 1:3.
> Now 1:5 is closer, but not delivering the same shadow detail and  
> contrast
> (speed).  Having to re-calibrate my system with each developer batch  
> is not
> my idea of a good time.  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed film.  We'll see.
>
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor  
> ---------------------~-->
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US &  
> Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/ucIolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ~->
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls  
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish  
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting  
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to  
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject  
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the  
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to  
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed film.  We'll see.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com

Just curious Paul, I seem to recall something about Tmax-100 + 
Microdol-X 1+3, as producing sharp negs for scanning. What have been 
your experience with this combination ?
Cheers,
Andre

>>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
>> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed film.  We'll see.
>

I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's just another Tmax 100, as
far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech Pan.

>Just curious Paul, I seem to recall something about Tmax-100 +
>Microdol-X 1+3, as producing sharp negs for scanning. What have been
>your experience with this combination ?

Andre, my old (enlarger days) standard was Tmax 100 with Microdol x 1:3.
With 3 minute agitation intervals it gave an amazingly sharp image.  Since
there was no Photoshop for unsharp masking, this development did about the
same thing chemically.

However, I find with scanning & Photoshop that it's a lot easier to sharpen
details than smooth grain.  The chemical sharpening of the dilute developer
+ infrequent agitation not only enhanced the fine detail but also the grain.

Now I find that grain is the limiting factor with 100 speed films.  Xtol
seems to be about the best at reducing grain and keeping the speed up, but
it can only do so much.  That is what caused my renewed interest in Tech
Pan.  With Tech Pan (and the Nikon 8000 grain reduction option) I can easily
take my 645 negatives up to 22 x 28 inches with virtually no grain.  (At
least that was true with Xtol.  I'm not sure there is another TP developer
that can do this.)

Unfortunately, dilute Xtol is apparently just too inconsistent with TP.
Kodak once recommended Xtol 1:5 for TP.  They have dropped that
recommendation.  They have also dropped the 1 liter packages.  They claim it
is due to packaging problems, but I've been told by a chemist that powder
mixing is very tricky, and the Xtol problem is probably due to a powder
component that is so small that it can't be consistently mixed and packaged
in small quantities.  It may be that even in 5 liter packages the problem
surfaces with high dilutions and the super-sensitive TP film.  (Xtol also
has problems relating to water quality.  I mix and dilute with distilled
water, so I assume I've controlled that issue.)

At any rate, I'm distressed at the Xtol problems with TP, because it was the
most even and finest-grain developer I found for the film, which is a
notorious bear to tame.  I'll try Kodak's Technidol again (I've never been
very impressed with it's evenness or cost) and also TD-3 (Photographers
Formulary), which may have been the second best developer I used with TP.
It produces more grain than Xtol, but it also produces more speed, which
would be nice to have.  The evenness is just OK, but that may be as good as
it gets with TP.  I might just see if I can live with it.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

> I'll try Kodak's Technidol again (I've never been
> very impressed with it's evenness or cost) and also TD-3 
>(Photographers Formulary)
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,
FWIW, here's a recipe I've used with 35mm TechPan
and may try with TP 120.

TechPan + Edwal FG-7
Normal scene: 2 minutes @ Ei 32 
Interior flash: 3 min @ EI 64
Highly diffused light: 4 min @ EI 125

-16 oz of water @ 68F
-Add 35mm Sodium Sulfite
-Add 35mm Edwal FG7 and mix
-Filter dilution (Use a coffee filter)
-Presoak film: 1 minute
-Agitate: First 15 sec, then for 5 sec. every 30 seconds.
Cheers,
Andre

Andre,
     You said 35mm of Sodium Sulfite and 35mm of FG-7.  I'm sure that you meant ml. However what are the mixing instructions or  the dilutions of these chemicals? 
       
       As for developing the film, how do you prevent uneven development? Do you prewet and then immerse the film? I've found that  a dunk into a tank filled with water for 30-60 sec followed by developer helps. I also only agitate/process with a stainless rod every 30 sec. And of course the whole process is carried out in total darkness. 

      I'd be curious about what your tones look like. Have you ever plotted curves for any of your negatives?  I used Technidol and found that highlights were blocked somewhat. If you have the bugs worked out, this film is turely remarkable for it's sharpness and I would probably try it again.

Russ Martin


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Here's that TP-FG7 dev. times again with the corrections. Except for 
the lack of grain, the tones resembled pretty much that of FP-4 and 
ID-11 I was using at the time.

Not being an expert at film development, and this being an easy 
receipe to follow, I'll let the experts plot any curve, dmax, etc.
Cheers,
Andre


TechPan + Edwal FG-7
Normal scene: 2 minutes @ Ei 32 
Interior flash: 3 min @ EI 64
Highly diffused light: 4 min @ EI 125

-16 oz of water @ 68F
-Add 35ml Sodium Sulfite and mix
-Add 35ml Edwal FG7 and mix
-Filter dilution (Use a coffee filter)
-Presoak film: 1 minute
-Agitate: First 15 sec, then for 5 sec. every 30 seconds.
Cheers,
Andre

I assume that is 35ml of the 9 percent sulfite mix Edwal recommends 
for "finer grain"? That also shortens developing times.

My best TP experiences were with 4x5, pre-exposed to Zone II to lift 
the curve in the low values, developed in Rodinal 1:125 (much more 
economical than Technidol), with a bit of selenium toner on occasion 
if the highlights were too flat.

The pre-flash to Zone II works with roll film too, if your camera 
double exposes, just use a plexi diffuser, really helps the shadows. 
Both tricks are commonly done with Pola T55, of course.


>Here's that TP-FG7 dev. times again with the corrections. Except for
>the lack of grain, the tones resembled pretty much that of FP-4 and
>ID-11 I was using at the time.
>
>Not being an expert at film development, and this being an easy
>receipe to follow, I'll let the experts plot any curve, dmax, etc.
>Cheers,
>Andre
>
>
>TechPan + Edwal FG-7
>Normal scene: 2 minutes @ Ei 32
>Interior flash: 3 min @ EI 64
>Highly diffused light: 4 min @ EI 125
>
>-16 oz of water @ 68F
>-Add 35ml Sodium Sulfite and mix
>-Add 35ml Edwal FG7 and mix
>-Filter dilution (Use a coffee filter)
>-Presoak film: 1 minute
>-Agitate: First 15 sec, then for 5 sec. every 30 seconds.
>Cheers,
>Andre
>
>
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
>this same page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>to keep them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


-- 
Bruce C. Kinch
Associate Professor of Photography
The Art Institute of Boston at Lesley University

Thanks Andre,
        I thought it was something like that.
Russ


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

For TechPan I've always had good luck with Agfa Rodinal.

Sheet Film 1:150 for 7:30 at 68F.   Roll Film 1:200 for 11:00 at 68F.  Agitation is continuous for the first 75 seconds, and then 15 seconds in each subsequent minute.  

Regards,

David

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Paul Roark 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 8:27 PM
  Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol


  >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
  >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed film.  We'll see.
  >

  I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's just another Tmax 100, as
  far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech Pan.

  >Just curious Paul, I seem to recall something about Tmax-100 +
  >Microdol-X 1+3, as producing sharp negs for scanning. What have been
  >your experience with this combination ?

  Andre, my old (enlarger days) standard was Tmax 100 with Microdol x 1:3.
  With 3 minute agitation intervals it gave an amazingly sharp image.  Since
  there was no Photoshop for unsharp masking, this development did about the
  same thing chemically.

  However, I find with scanning & Photoshop that it's a lot easier to sharpen
  details than smooth grain.  The chemical sharpening of the dilute developer
  + infrequent agitation not only enhanced the fine detail but also the grain.

  Now I find that grain is the limiting factor with 100 speed films.  Xtol
  seems to be about the best at reducing grain and keeping the speed up, but
  it can only do so much.  That is what caused my renewed interest in Tech
  Pan.  With Tech Pan (and the Nikon 8000 grain reduction option) I can easily
  take my 645 negatives up to 22 x 28 inches with virtually no grain.  (At
  least that was true with Xtol.  I'm not sure there is another TP developer
  that can do this.)

  Unfortunately, dilute Xtol is apparently just too inconsistent with TP.
  Kodak once recommended Xtol 1:5 for TP.  They have dropped that
  recommendation.  They have also dropped the 1 liter packages.  They claim it
  is due to packaging problems, but I've been told by a chemist that powder
  mixing is very tricky, and the Xtol problem is probably due to a powder
  component that is so small that it can't be consistently mixed and packaged
  in small quantities.  It may be that even in 5 liter packages the problem
  surfaces with high dilutions and the super-sensitive TP film.  (Xtol also
  has problems relating to water quality.  I mix and dilute with distilled
  water, so I assume I've controlled that issue.)

  At any rate, I'm distressed at the Xtol problems with TP, because it was the
  most even and finest-grain developer I found for the film, which is a
  notorious bear to tame.  I'll try Kodak's Technidol again (I've never been
  very impressed with it's evenness or cost) and also TD-3 (Photographers
  Formulary), which may have been the second best developer I used with TP.
  It produces more grain than Xtol, but it also produces more speed, which
  would be nice to have.  The evenness is just OK, but that may be as good as
  it gets with TP.  I might just see if I can live with it.

  Paul
  http://www.PaulRoark.com




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
film with acros.

Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
actually be released in the states.

Don

--- Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
> >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> film.  We'll see.
> >
> 
> I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> just another Tmax 100, as
> far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> Pan.
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

Don,

I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology has the
best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an excellent addition
to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I wanted more
than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were unrealistic.
Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
___________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@...]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol


Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
film with acros.

Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
actually be released in the states.

Don

--- Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
> >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> film.  We'll see.
> >
>
> I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> just another Tmax 100, as
> far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> Pan.
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the 
old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with excellent 
grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the 
meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also tried 
Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though its 
reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low 
light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if 
you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:

www.jandcphoto.com

Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine 
grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:

www.freestylephoto.biz

Happy shooting!

Dirk Hobman


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Don,
> 
> I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology 
has the
> best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an excellent 
addition
> to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I 
wanted more
> than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were 
unrealistic.
> Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> ___________________________________
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> 
> 
> Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> film with acros.
> 
> Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> actually be released in the states.
> 
> Don
> 
> --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > film.  We'll see.
> > >
> >
> > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > just another Tmax 100, as
> > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > Pan.
> >
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, 
Polls and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Anyone tried this?

Quote from Speedibrews site

Technical Pan film is in a class of its own with resolution streets 
ahead of CCD/Digital. The snag is the harsh contrast (necessary for 
astronomy purposes) which makes Tech Pan a right pig to work as a 
pictorial film. Many low contrast developers have been tried over the 
years but Speedibrews now has the answer for workers preferring to 
scan film negatives and work on prints via a digital option.

CELER MONO tames Tech Pan, yielding a clean negative absolutely 
tailor-made for digital scanning. The negatives contain an amazing 
tonal range, almost impossible to duplicate by conventional 
developers, whilst offering a true 2-stops speed increase to a nice 
and familiar 100 ISO film rating. The resolution even out-performs 
most camera lenses.

Because Tech Pan is a specialist film, the extended red sensitivity 
is really effective under artificial lighting. CELER MONO is a 
universal developer, working with all films, including the 'So-
called' "Chromogenics", all of which can be printed conventionally, 
or digitally scanned.

Most films are developed in 10 to 12 minutes at the standard 20 
degrees Celsius. The modern trend to higher temperatures is also 
recommended and times for 24 degrees Celsius are given in the 
comprehensive instructions.

Unquote

Seems like a good product but has anyone used it?

Gareth
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman" 
<dhobman@h...> wrote:
> I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the 
> old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with 
excellent 
> grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the 
> meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also tried 
> Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though its 
> reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low 
> light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if 
> you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
> 
> www.jandcphoto.com
> 
> Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine 
> grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
> 
> www.freestylephoto.biz
> 
> Happy shooting!
> 
> Dirk Hobman
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > Don,
> > 
> > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology 
> has the
> > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an 
excellent 
> addition
> > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I 
> wanted more
> > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were 
> unrealistic.
> > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> > 
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > ___________________________________
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> > 
> > 
> > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > film with acros.
> > 
> > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > actually be released in the states.
> > 
> > Don
> > 
> > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > film.  We'll see.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > Pan.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, 
> Polls and
> > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> > 
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
> wish to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same
> > page.
> > 
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier 
messages 

> to keep
> > them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various
> > resources on the homepage.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi Dirk, Thanks to you and all others for helpful replies to my 
initial enquiry. Like you, I preferred using the APX 25 in my 
traditional darkroom. I thought that all ISO25 B&W films (except 
TechPan) were history. Hence, your post re. Efke 25 is of much 
interest to me. How does it compare with the APX25? I am just 
starting out in digital and wanted to prepare a few new negs. 
optimized for scanning before taking on the task of learning 
photoshop,curves...etc. What developer/time do you use with that film 
for digital work?
Regards, Marc.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman" 
<dhobman@h...> wrote:
> I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the 
> old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with 
excellent 
> grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the 
> meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also tried 
> Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though its 
> reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low 
> light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if 
> you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
> 
> www.jandcphoto.com
> 
> Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine 
> grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
> 
> www.freestylephoto.biz
> 
> Happy shooting!
> 
> Dirk Hobman
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > Don,
> > 
> > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology 
> has the
> > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an 
excellent 
> addition
> > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I 
> wanted more
> > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were 
> unrealistic.
> > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> > 
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > ___________________________________
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> > 
> > 
> > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > film with acros.
> > 
> > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > actually be released in the states.
> > 
> > Don
> > 
> > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > film.  We'll see.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > Pan.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, 
> Polls and
> > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> > 
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
> wish to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same
> > page.
> > 
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier 
messages 

> to keep
> > them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various
> > resources on the homepage.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Marc,

>Like you, I preferred using the APX 25 in my traditional darkroom.

I concur, but the old-style reciprocity failure was a problem.  Also, by the
time a traditional (non-enhanced red sensitivity) 25 ISO film is heavily
filtered, even cloud movement becomes a problem.  I eventually switched to
Tmax 100, which, along with Neopan 100, can virtually match the APX 25
grain.

> I thought that all ISO25 B&W films (except TechPan) were history.
>Hence, your post re. Efke 25 is of much interest to me.

Some internet research I did a few days ago indicated some
production/quality issues.  For 120, among other things, one person
commented that light can often leak in around the paper.  So, film changing
in bright light can be a problem.

It's said to be an old-style, silver-rich formula.  For some purposes, this
could be very interesting.  While I acknowledge that there are some
advantages to the advanced-grain technologies, the old stuff had some
advantages also.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
_________________________________

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman"
<dhobman@h...> wrote:
> I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the
> old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with
excellent
> grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the
> meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also tried
> Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though its
> reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low
> light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if
> you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
>
> www.jandcphoto.com
>
> Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine
> grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
>
> www.freestylephoto.biz
>
> Happy shooting!
>
> Dirk Hobman
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > Don,
> >
> > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology
> has the
> > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an
excellent
> addition
> > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I
> wanted more
> > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were
> unrealistic.
> > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> >
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > ___________________________________
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> >
> >
> > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > film with acros.
> >
> > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > actually be released in the states.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > film.  We'll see.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > Pan.
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
> Polls and
> > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> wish to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> this same
> > page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
messages
> to keep
> > them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> flames
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> various
> > resources on the homepage.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Gareth,

It seems like lots of little companies and individuals (like me) have at
some time come up with "the" solution for Tech Pan development.  It's
expensive and time consuming to test all the brews.  It's also impossible to
compare all these developers based on just the claims of the manufacturer.
So, I'll start my search for an Xtol replacement by going with what I found
in past testing.  If some one else has good test data or experience with one
of the brews and it's not overpriced, I'll give that a try also.

For testing I shoot grayscale patches (from the Kodak Bland-and White
Darkroom Data Guide) covering a 13 stop range.  (This takes 4 frames -- one
on the spot meter reading, one -3 stops, one at +3 stops, and one at +6
stops.  They are read under my enlarger [dichro head] with an enlarger
meter.)  I also shoot resolution charts and plain, middle-gray frames (to
evaluate the evenness of development).

If, like with SpeediBrew's CELER MONO, the seller gives a speed, that helps,
but it is only one end of the curve.  Also, the way most people measure
speed, it might be mostly reflecting contrast, and not how many stops below
the meter's gray point that shadow detail can be printed.  I want to know
how far down the shadow detail is useable.

Most developers do not allow TP to capture a very broad range of light.
With most developers it ends up having, if you're lucky, a latitude that
close to slide film (about 7 stops -- with low quality shadows at that).
This is just not enough for good printing for many scenes.

Yesterday I developed a 120 roll of TP in Kodak's Technidol.  Since that is
the (way too expensive) special developer Kodak makes for the film, it seems
like a good standard against which to measure other brews' performances.
With Technidol, the TP had a straight-line curve that extended for about 11
stops.  The toe and shoulder were short, but the shoulder was not totally
useless.  My scanner (Nikon 8000) could separate the entire 13 stop range of
my test procedure.  This is impressive for TP.

What I'd like to see are the characteristic curves of competing brews
overlaid on this Technidol-TP curve.  That tells me the most about speed,
dynamic range, and the "look" of the film.  (I prefer a slightly "S" shaped
curve to a straight line.  I think it gives a better balance of contrast and
dynamic range.)

The Technidol plain gray (ground glass over the lens at f 11 and middle gray
exposure) frames were reasonably even -- a very hard thing to accomplish
with medium format & TP.

If Technidol were not so expensive ($5 a roll for medium format), I might
stop my experiments here.  However, I also have a 1998 TD-3 test that shows
it can capture all 13 stops, give a true speed increase, comparable grain,
OK evenness, and a nice, "S" shaped curve.  So, given it's vastly lower
price, I'll see what I can do with it.

I have no doubt there are a number of good TP developer combinations.  I
used to mix my own POTA before Kodak started making that commercially.  (It
has since been dropped because Technidol is finer grained and more even in
development.)  Having once mixed developer from the raw chemicals, I don't
want to bother with that again.  So, price and easy, reliable availability
are part of what I'm looking for.  Over here, Photographer's Formulary has a
good reputation and will probably still be in business for a long time.  So,
if their brew works as well as I think I can get it to work, it has
substantial appeal.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
___________________________________________

>Anyone tried this?

>Quote from Speedibrews site

>Technical Pan film is in a class of its own with resolution streets
>ahead of CCD/Digital. The snag is the harsh contrast (necessary for
>astronomy purposes) which makes Tech Pan a right pig to work as a
>pictorial film. Many low contrast developers have been tried over the
>years but Speedibrews now has the answer for workers preferring to
>scan film negatives and work on prints via a digital option.

>CELER MONO tames Tech Pan, yielding a clean negative absolutely
>tailor-made for digital scanning. The negatives contain an amazing
>tonal range, almost impossible to duplicate by conventional
>developers, whilst offering a true 2-stops speed increase to a nice
>and familiar 100 ISO film rating. The resolution even out-performs
>most camera lenses.

>Because Tech Pan is a specialist film, the extended red sensitivity
>is really effective under artificial lighting. CELER MONO is a
>universal developer, working with all films, including the 'So-
>called' "Chromogenics", all of which can be printed conventionally,
>or digitally scanned.

>Most films are developed in 10 to 12 minutes at the standard 20
>degrees Celsius. The modern trend to higher temperatures is also
>recommended and times for 24 degrees Celsius are given in the
>comprehensive instructions.

>Unquote

>Seems like a good product but has anyone used it?

>Gareth
__________________________

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman"
<dhobman@h...> wrote:
> I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the
> old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with
excellent
> grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the
> meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also tried
> Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though its
> reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low
> light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if
> you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
>
> www.jandcphoto.com
>
> Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine
> grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
>
> www.freestylephoto.biz
>
> Happy shooting!
>
> Dirk Hobman
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > Don,
> >
> > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology
> has the
> > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an
excellent
> addition
> > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I
> wanted more
> > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were
> unrealistic.
> > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> >
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > ___________________________________
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> >
> >
> > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > film with acros.
> >
> > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > actually be released in the states.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > film.  We'll see.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > Pan.
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
> Polls and
> > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> wish to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> this same
> > page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
messages
> to keep
> > them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> flames
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> various
> > resources on the homepage.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I love that Tech Pan when shooting and I hate it when processing it!

That technidol beer foam developer makes me think that it's a cheap 
developer that needs a wetting agent to work.

I'm sure it's a cheap formula that can be done easaly at home. Kodak 
just tells us that we need that wetting agent as the Kodak formula of 
technidol looks like a good glas of beer.

I have learnt myself to do the following when developing Tech Pan.

Only use destilled water - 20 degress celsius (68 in US?).

Presoak for two minutes with some slow agitation.
Spill it out - yepp it's black!
Use Technidol that is  diluted for 25% more than stated.
Develop for about 6minutes and 30 seconds. Agitate continiusly for 
the first 30 seconds then 5 seconds every 30 seconds until finished.
Stopbath 15 second or more.
Fix in hardening fixer for about 10 minutes - agitatete now and then.
(5 seconds every 30 seconds).
Photoflo and the other stuff as usual.

However - can someone give me that EXPENSIVE Kodak formula?
I have the wetting agent and soap to make it look like beer!

To get rid of the red sensivity use a mild green filter. For me the 
red sensivity is no problem. 

Lux!
Bo
Sweden





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Gareth,
> 
> It seems like lots of little companies and individuals (like me) 
have at
> some time come up with "the" solution for Tech Pan development.  
It's
> expensive and time consuming to test all the brews.  It's also 
impossible to
> compare all these developers based on just the claims of the 
manufacturer.
> So, I'll start my search for an Xtol replacement by going with what 
I found
> in past testing.  If some one else has good test data or experience 
with one
> of the brews and it's not overpriced, I'll give that a try also.
> 
> For testing I shoot grayscale patches (from the Kodak Bland-and 
White
> Darkroom Data Guide) covering a 13 stop range.  (This takes 4 
frames -- one
> on the spot meter reading, one -3 stops, one at +3 stops, and one 
at +6
> stops.  They are read under my enlarger [dichro head] with an 
enlarger
> meter.)  I also shoot resolution charts and plain, middle-gray 
frames (to
> evaluate the evenness of development).
> 
> If, like with SpeediBrew's CELER MONO, the seller gives a speed, 
that helps,
> but it is only one end of the curve.  Also, the way most people 
measure
> speed, it might be mostly reflecting contrast, and not how many 
stops below
> the meter's gray point that shadow detail can be printed.  I want 
to know
> how far down the shadow detail is useable.
> 
> Most developers do not allow TP to capture a very broad range of 
light.
> With most developers it ends up having, if you're lucky, a latitude 
that
> close to slide film (about 7 stops -- with low quality shadows at 
that).
> This is just not enough for good printing for many scenes.
> 
> Yesterday I developed a 120 roll of TP in Kodak's Technidol.  Since 
that is
> the (way too expensive) special developer Kodak makes for the film, 
it seems
> like a good standard against which to measure other brews' 
performances.
> With Technidol, the TP had a straight-line curve that extended for 
about 11
> stops.  The toe and shoulder were short, but the shoulder was not 
totally
> useless.  My scanner (Nikon 8000) could separate the entire 13 stop 
range of
> my test procedure.  This is impressive for TP.
> 
> What I'd like to see are the characteristic curves of competing 
brews
> overlaid on this Technidol-TP curve.  That tells me the most about 
speed,
> dynamic range, and the "look" of the film.  (I prefer a 
slightly "S" shaped
> curve to a straight line.  I think it gives a better balance of 
contrast and
> dynamic range.)
> 
> The Technidol plain gray (ground glass over the lens at f 11 and 
middle gray
> exposure) frames were reasonably even -- a very hard thing to 
accomplish
> with medium format & TP.
> 
> If Technidol were not so expensive ($5 a roll for medium format), I 
might
> stop my experiments here.  However, I also have a 1998 TD-3 test 
that shows
> it can capture all 13 stops, give a true speed increase, comparable 
grain,
> OK evenness, and a nice, "S" shaped curve.  So, given it's vastly 
lower
> price, I'll see what I can do with it.
> 
> I have no doubt there are a number of good TP developer 
combinations.  I
> used to mix my own POTA before Kodak started making that 
commercially.  (It
> has since been dropped because Technidol is finer grained and more 
even in
> development.)  Having once mixed developer from the raw chemicals, 
I don't
> want to bother with that again.  So, price and easy, reliable 
availability
> are part of what I'm looking for.  Over here, Photographer's 
Formulary has a
> good reputation and will probably still be in business for a long 
time.  So,
> if their brew works as well as I think I can get it to work, it has
> substantial appeal.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> ___________________________________________
> 
> >Anyone tried this?
> 
> >Quote from Speedibrews site
> 
> >Technical Pan film is in a class of its own with resolution streets
> >ahead of CCD/Digital. The snag is the harsh contrast (necessary for
> >astronomy purposes) which makes Tech Pan a right pig to work as a
> >pictorial film. Many low contrast developers have been tried over 
the
> >years but Speedibrews now has the answer for workers preferring to
> >scan film negatives and work on prints via a digital option.
> 
> >CELER MONO tames Tech Pan, yielding a clean negative absolutely
> >tailor-made for digital scanning. The negatives contain an amazing
> >tonal range, almost impossible to duplicate by conventional
> >developers, whilst offering a true 2-stops speed increase to a nice
> >and familiar 100 ISO film rating. The resolution even out-performs
> >most camera lenses.
> 
> >Because Tech Pan is a specialist film, the extended red sensitivity
> >is really effective under artificial lighting. CELER MONO is a
> >universal developer, working with all films, including the 'So-
> >called' "Chromogenics", all of which can be printed conventionally,
> >or digitally scanned.
> 
> >Most films are developed in 10 to 12 minutes at the standard 20
> >degrees Celsius. The modern trend to higher temperatures is also
> >recommended and times for 24 degrees Celsius are given in the
> >comprehensive instructions.
> 
> >Unquote
> 
> >Seems like a good product but has anyone used it?
> 
> >Gareth
> __________________________
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman"
> <dhobman@h...> wrote:
> > I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the
> > old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with
> excellent
> > grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the
> > meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also 
tried
> > Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though 
its
> > reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low
> > light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if
> > you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
> >
> > www.jandcphoto.com
> >
> > Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine
> > grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
> >
> > www.freestylephoto.biz
> >
> > Happy shooting!
> >
> > Dirk Hobman
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > Don,
> > >
> > > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology
> > has the
> > > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an
> excellent
> > addition
> > > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I
> > wanted more
> > > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were
> > unrealistic.
> > > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > > ___________________________________
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> > >
> > >
> > > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > > film with acros.
> > >
> > > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > > actually be released in the states.
> > >
> > > Don
> > >
> > > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > > film.  We'll see.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > > Pan.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
> > Polls and
> > > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> > >
> > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> > wish to
> > > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> > this same
> > > page.
> > >
> > > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > > - Include your full name with your message.
> > > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
> messages
> > to keep
> > > them short.
> > > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the 
subject
> > header.
> > > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> > flames
> > > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> > various
> > > resources on the homepage.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, 
Polls and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Personally, I love TD-3 for Techpan.  Here is a recent shot I took 
using the combo:

http://www.geocities.com/markhahn2000/paw2003/paw2003w23.html

mark

Bo,

>I love that Tech Pan when shooting and I hate it when processing it!

So true.  I also love it when making large prints.

>That technidol beer foam developer makes me think that it's a cheap
>developer that needs a wetting agent to work.

I'm sure Kodak is making a huge profit on it.  However, I don't
underestimate the company's photo & chemistry expertise.

>... technidol looks like a good glas of beer.

But it costs more.

>I have learnt myself to do the following when developing Tech Pan.

>Only use destilled water - 20 degress celsius (68 in US?).

Definitely use only distilled water.  I develop at 75 F/24 C, mostly because
my summer water and darkroom temperature is about that.

>Presoak for two minutes with some slow agitation.

I use the Kodak method of lowering the dry film into the developer.

>Use Technidol that is  diluted for 25% more than stated.

I tried a 120 roll in 500 ml of solution that had just a single packet of
developer -- half what Kodak recommends.  It didn't work out very well --
uneven, lower speed, and flat highlights.

>Develop for about 6minutes and 30 seconds. Agitate continiusly for
>the first 30 seconds then 5 seconds every 30 seconds until finished.

Getting your agitation technique right is a huge part of the game with this
film.  I'm sure there are a number of approaches that work.

>To get rid of the red sensivity use a mild green filter. For me the
>red sensivity is no problem.

I love the red sensitivity.  The film also does not lose sharpness with
orange or red filtration like the "advanced grain" (Tmax, Neopan Acros,
Delta) films do.

>...can someone give me that EXPENSIVE Kodak formula?
>I have the wetting agent and soap to make it look like beer!

Maybe it is beer!  (I'll let you taste it.)

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
__________________________________




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Gareth,
>
> It seems like lots of little companies and individuals (like me)
have at
> some time come up with "the" solution for Tech Pan development.
It's
> expensive and time consuming to test all the brews.  It's also
impossible to
> compare all these developers based on just the claims of the
manufacturer.
> So, I'll start my search for an Xtol replacement by going with what
I found
> in past testing.  If some one else has good test data or experience
with one
> of the brews and it's not overpriced, I'll give that a try also.
>
> For testing I shoot grayscale patches (from the Kodak Bland-and
White
> Darkroom Data Guide) covering a 13 stop range.  (This takes 4
frames -- one
> on the spot meter reading, one -3 stops, one at +3 stops, and one
at +6
> stops.  They are read under my enlarger [dichro head] with an
enlarger
> meter.)  I also shoot resolution charts and plain, middle-gray
frames (to
> evaluate the evenness of development).
>
> If, like with SpeediBrew's CELER MONO, the seller gives a speed,
that helps,
> but it is only one end of the curve.  Also, the way most people
measure
> speed, it might be mostly reflecting contrast, and not how many
stops below
> the meter's gray point that shadow detail can be printed.  I want
to know
> how far down the shadow detail is useable.
>
> Most developers do not allow TP to capture a very broad range of
light.
> With most developers it ends up having, if you're lucky, a latitude
that
> close to slide film (about 7 stops -- with low quality shadows at
that).
> This is just not enough for good printing for many scenes.
>
> Yesterday I developed a 120 roll of TP in Kodak's Technidol.  Since
that is
> the (way too expensive) special developer Kodak makes for the film,
it seems
> like a good standard against which to measure other brews'
performances.
> With Technidol, the TP had a straight-line curve that extended for
about 11
> stops.  The toe and shoulder were short, but the shoulder was not
totally
> useless.  My scanner (Nikon 8000) could separate the entire 13 stop
range of
> my test procedure.  This is impressive for TP.
>
> What I'd like to see are the characteristic curves of competing
brews
> overlaid on this Technidol-TP curve.  That tells me the most about
speed,
> dynamic range, and the "look" of the film.  (I prefer a
slightly "S" shaped
> curve to a straight line.  I think it gives a better balance of
contrast and
> dynamic range.)
>
> The Technidol plain gray (ground glass over the lens at f 11 and
middle gray
> exposure) frames were reasonably even -- a very hard thing to
accomplish
> with medium format & TP.
>
> If Technidol were not so expensive ($5 a roll for medium format), I
might
> stop my experiments here.  However, I also have a 1998 TD-3 test
that shows
> it can capture all 13 stops, give a true speed increase, comparable
grain,
> OK evenness, and a nice, "S" shaped curve.  So, given it's vastly
lower
> price, I'll see what I can do with it.
>
> I have no doubt there are a number of good TP developer
combinations.  I
> used to mix my own POTA before Kodak started making that
commercially.  (It
> has since been dropped because Technidol is finer grained and more
even in
> development.)  Having once mixed developer from the raw chemicals,
I don't
> want to bother with that again.  So, price and easy, reliable
availability
> are part of what I'm looking for.  Over here, Photographer's
Formulary has a
> good reputation and will probably still be in business for a long
time.  So,
> if their brew works as well as I think I can get it to work, it has
> substantial appeal.
>
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> ___________________________________________
>
> >Anyone tried this?
>
> >Quote from Speedibrews site
>
> >Technical Pan film is in a class of its own with resolution streets
> >ahead of CCD/Digital. The snag is the harsh contrast (necessary for
> >astronomy purposes) which makes Tech Pan a right pig to work as a
> >pictorial film. Many low contrast developers have been tried over
the
> >years but Speedibrews now has the answer for workers preferring to
> >scan film negatives and work on prints via a digital option.
>
> >CELER MONO tames Tech Pan, yielding a clean negative absolutely
> >tailor-made for digital scanning. The negatives contain an amazing
> >tonal range, almost impossible to duplicate by conventional
> >developers, whilst offering a true 2-stops speed increase to a nice
> >and familiar 100 ISO film rating. The resolution even out-performs
> >most camera lenses.
>
> >Because Tech Pan is a specialist film, the extended red sensitivity
> >is really effective under artificial lighting. CELER MONO is a
> >universal developer, working with all films, including the 'So-
> >called' "Chromogenics", all of which can be printed conventionally,
> >or digitally scanned.
>
> >Most films are developed in 10 to 12 minutes at the standard 20
> >degrees Celsius. The modern trend to higher temperatures is also
> >recommended and times for 24 degrees Celsius are given in the
> >comprehensive instructions.
>
> >Unquote
>
> >Seems like a good product but has anyone used it?
>
> >Gareth
> __________________________
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dirkhobman"
> <dhobman@h...> wrote:
> > I have had mixed results with TechPan and personally preferred the
> > old Agfa APX 25. I found it had much smoother tonality with
> excellent
> > grain characteristics. I still have some rolls of it, but in the
> > meantime have found Efke R25 to be a fine alternative. I also
tried
> > Acros 100, and, like Paul, had unrealistic expectations (though
its
> > reciprocity characteristics make it outstanding for low
> > light/nighttime photography). Efke R25 can be hard to find, but if
> > you'd like to try it, you can buy it at the following site:
> >
> > www.jandcphoto.com
> >
> > Also, though I haven't tried it, Maco also produces an ISO 25 fine
> > grain film that is panchromatic. You can find it for sale at:
> >
> > www.freestylephoto.biz
> >
> > Happy shooting!
> >
> > Dirk Hobman
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > Don,
> > >
> > > I agree, Fuji makes great films.  I think their color technology
> > has the
> > > best grain.  So, with luck this new c-41 film will be an
> excellent
> > addition
> > > to our quiver.  My only disappointment with Acros 100 was that I
> > wanted more
> > > than just another excellent 100 ISO film.  My expectations were
> > unrealistic.
> > > Tech Pan still has a noticeable edge in image quality.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> > > ___________________________________
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: D. Hill [mailto:hill14701@y...]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 7:44 AM
> > > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: TechXactol
> > >
> > >
> > > Having been a loyal fan of Fuji films for the last 12
> > > years or so - I thought they had reached an excellent
> > > film with acros.
> > >
> > > Leafing through a magazine yesterday (Black and White)
> > > I noticed that Neopan C41 will soon be released.  I
> > > imagine it is modeled after xp-2 - but very exciting
> > > news none the less.  As this was a European magazine,
> > > one can only hold their breath as to wonder if it will
> > > actually be released in the states.
> > >
> > > Don
> > >
> > > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > > >>  So I'm going to see how Neopan 100 works.  It
> > > > >> claims to have the finest grain of any 100 speed
> > > > film.  We'll see.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm under-whelmed by my first Neopan test.  It's
> > > > just another Tmax 100, as
> > > > far as I can tell.  Not in the same league with Tech
> > > > Pan.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
> > Polls and
> > > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> > >
> > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> > wish to
> > > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> > this same
> > > page.
> > >
> > > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > > - Include your full name with your message.
> > > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
> messages
> > to keep
> > > them short.
> > > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the
subject
> > header.
> > > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> > flames
> > > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> > various
> > > resources on the homepage.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
Polls and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
this same
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages
to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
various
> resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> I use the Kodak method of lowering the dry film into the developer.

Paul, what is the "Kodak method"?
Regards,  Marc.

>> I use the Kodak method of lowering the dry film into the developer.

>Paul, what is the "Kodak method"?

Rather than pour the developer into a tank that has the film reel in it,
Kodak recommends for Tech Pan that you lower the reel with the film into a
tank that has the developer already in it (in the dark, obviously).  So,
while it means more work in darkness, it results in more even development
and perhaps fewer bubbles on the film.

I might also mention that I tap the tank onto the counter top hard twice and
soft a couple of times after each agitation to dislodge the bubbles that get
caught under the reel and on the film surface.

One other thing I do is use only half the recommended concentration of Photo
Flo in a final distilled water rinse.  This helps avoid Newton's rings with
the Nikon glass carrier.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

the tones look very even which is always a problem with Tech Pan. What was the developing time? If there is a developer out there with a reasonably long time, it would go a long way to evening out the tones.

Russ Martin


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The film was rated at 80 asa and development was 15 min. at 5 sec. 
per minute.  Honestly I find the tones to be very "right".

mark


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, mfaphoto@o... 
wrote:
> the tones look very even which is always a problem with Tech Pan. 
What was the developing time? If there is a developer out there with 
a reasonably long time, it would go a long way to evening out the 
tones.

> 
> Russ Martin
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Mark,
     I wasn't saying that your tones were not right. I really did not make myself clear on that. Sorry!  In fact, I find your tones to be excellent. The fact that you used a developer with long developing times proves my point. Eveness of tones is a function of the developer time. 
     What developer did you use? Sorry I lost that part of the tread. 
E-mail me off group on that. I really don't want to take up more space.

Russ


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

One easy and very inexpensive solution for developing
tech-pan is to use Rodinal at extremely high
dilutions.  1:100 or 1:200 with a modified stand
development (agitate for 15-30 seconds, tap for air
bubbles and let tank rest for 3 minutes - do this
about 5-7 times).  I used this method with apx25, and
tech-pan responds with quite similar results.  At
extremely high dilutions, Rodinal acts as a
compensating developer, and has remarkable edge
effects.

As there is not much developer, you need to use a
larger tank than normal - and without continuous
agitation as it will exhaust the developer rapidly.

Don

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com