Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > Monochrome Work > Monochrome Film

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 7th June 2009, 11:09 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default Fuji Neopan 400 and DDX or Perceptol

I got a 10 pack of the above several months ago from 7dayshop and used a 24 frame roll in 35mm on Thursday last, in and around Stratford-on-Avon including the Mary Arden( Will's mum) House complex at Wilmcote. Well worth a visit for anyone in the Midlands.

Anyway enough of the Midlands Tourist Board commercial, my real purpose is to ask if anyone here has used the above film and developers and can offer advice on times etc.

The Ilford DDX times and research on APUG seems to suggest a large degree of agreement. On a pure whim, I had lowered the film's rating on my camera to 320 just to see if shadow detail is any better and lo and behold discovered that one or two other Neopan afficionados on the aforementioned site do the same so I may be in good company.

So while the Ilford times for DDX are for the box speed, it looks as if they could form the basis for a good starting point but I would welcome anybody's experience.

Now we come to the more difficult bit. As the film is of the older technology and grainier I am tempted to use Perceptol. Here there is a surprise. While Ilford doesn't give most ISO 400 films a dev time at box speed for Perceptol, it does for Neopan. So this combined with my EI of 320 tends to suggest that using the ISO 400 times should be good. Well maybe. The Massive Development Chart which usually agrees with Ilford times, differs considerably on Perceptol, showing a much increased time for using Perceptol at stock with correspondingly smaller differences at 1+1 and 1+3.

My research revealed that I had asked a question on this several years ago on APUG as a result of having one roll but the replies I got were not that specific and I had made no attempt to record my findings. It was in my early days of B&W.

What does emerge however is that the opinion of other Neopan users suggests that it requires a departure from the Ilford agitation of 4-5 inversions over the first 10 sec of each and every minute. Gentle agitation for the full first minute was suggested then only 2-3 inversions thereafter until three quarters of the way through the time then in the last 2-3 mins, inversions only every other minute. It seems as if the film requires more agitation in its early stages and less towards the end to avoid blocked highlights.

So to summarise, my thoughts are:1. DDX may be the more certain developer in terms of outcomes

2. Perceptol may need less than the MDC times but a bit more than Ilfords

3. In the case of either DDX or Perceptol agitation should be gentle but continuous for maybe a minute then no more than half the Ilford pattern for the middle bit then maybe only 2 inversions once every other minute for the last quarter of the development time.

I noted from APUG that at least one of our friends, Mark Burley, was a fan of Neopan 400 but couldn't discover what his dev of choice was.

Mark, your contribution would be much appreciated.

I also noted that Les McLean has a personal time for Neopan 400 in his book but it involves HC110 which I don't have.

Maybe it's time for Prescysol which seems to avoid all this rigmarole about different times and variations on agitations

Any comments will be much appreciated. Thanks


Mike
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 8th June 2009, 07:49 AM
Sandeha Lynch's Avatar
Sandeha Lynch Sandeha Lynch is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wales (UK)
Posts: 398
Default

I use Neopan 400 most of the time in 120; always in DDX at 20C, and always with a 5 mins plain water presoak. In 35mm it's more likely to be Tri-x or FP4, though anything goes. In 120 NP400 is definitely a preference on my fixed lens cameras as it's a very safe film for pushing up to 800 or 1600.

I think my agitation pattern is much the same as I use with Rodinal, which may even be on the box ... gentle but firm continuous inversions for the first 30 secs, then 10 secs every minute (that's usually three inversions pm).

I reduce the time to avoid problems with excessive contrast. Instead of 7mins for 400, 6m10s; and instead of 10 mins for 800, 9m30s. I arrived at this through a discovery some years ago using Ilford's recommended times - the contrast was more to my liking at EI 800, and I worked backwards from there. Note that the percentage reduction is not the same for both speeds. As long as my dev temp is accurate I find the results very consistent.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 8th June 2009, 09:32 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

Sandeha, thanks for that. It is interesting that the percentage decrease is less for the pushed speed. Your inversion pattern is closer to those others who use NP400 than the standard Ilford pattern which reinforces that maybe NP400 is a film that needs a little more agitation initially and then less. My usual pattern in about 5 inversion for 10 secs every minute which over this kind of dev time must equate to a more vigorous overall pattern which it seems NP400 doesn't need.

Nice to know it can be pushed with success to 1 and even 2 stops. This is slightly off topic but any idea how NP400 pushed to 1600 compares to NP1600?

If a 2 stop push is as good or almost as good as using NP1600, it makes the purchase of NP1600 for those occasions when 1600 is needed somewhat redundant.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 7th October 2009, 11:16 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

This post is about Neopan 1600 but leads on from Sandeha's valuable reply to an extent that makes a separate thread unnecessary, I think.

First of all, Sandeha, can you say what your times are for a push to 1600? You gave the times for 800 but not 1600. Secondly what are the adverse consequences of doing this in terms of shadow detail for instance and constraint on enlargement compared to enlargement of a 400 neg.

I note from my research via APUG that the consensus seems to be that a finer grained film(400 v 1600) in a speed increasing developer which DDX qualifies as, produces a finer grained neg than a faster film in a speed reducing developer so 400 pushed to 800 in DDX might be better than 1600 reduced to 800 in Perceptol, even if there were published times.

Even if this true, it may not hold good for a push all the way from 400 to 1600 v a 1600 film developed at 1600. I just don't know

Interestingly while Perceptol works well at EI 1600 for D3200, Harman gives no times for Neopan 1600 and Perceptol. Of course if we accept that D3200 has a real speed of say 1250 or even 1000 then all we are asking Perceptol to do is cope with 1/3 to 1/2 stop increase at D3200 used at 1600 whereas with Neopan 1600 and a real speed of 650 we are asking it to cope with a stop and a half at 1600 which is a bigger jump in speed.

Mind you at 800 this is the same third of a stop increase from a real speed of 650 that Perceptol can cope with using D3200 at EI 1600 so there should be times for Neopan 1600 at 800 at least.

So crucially can Neopan 400 pushed to 800 and 1600 do as good a job as Neopan 1600?

Thanks, Sandeha for your comments and any others with Neopan 400 and 1600 experience.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 8th October 2009, 05:44 PM
Andrew Bartram's Avatar
Andrew Bartram Andrew Bartram is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Warboys, on the edge of the Cambrideshire Fens
Posts: 522
Default

I use Neopan all the time, usually in Prescysol partial stand - grain non existant up to 12X9.5 paper even on 35mm.
Just reprinted some negs from a roll developed in Rodinal, lovely negs biting sharp and grain well under control.
Don't be fooled by this film, rated at 250 typicially and processed in Prescysol partial stand for 10.5 mins you will get fabulous results.
Never tried it in DDX or Perceptol though.

Andrew
__________________
Fenland Camera and Darkroom (Affordable Workshops)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 8th October 2009, 06:51 PM
Sandeha Lynch's Avatar
Sandeha Lynch Sandeha Lynch is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wales (UK)
Posts: 398
Default

Hi Mike. I think I only once pushed to 1600 and I don't recall if I reduced the times - in fact I think it was just after this that I started with reductions. Possibly 13 mins, as per the MDC.



Cycle Museum, Llandrindod Wells - Zeiss Ikon Ikonta 521/16 (1948). Rodenstock Novar Anastigmat, 75mm, f3.5. Neopan 400 at EI 1600, dev'd in Ilford DDX.

It's not a shot I've ever wet printed, only scanned. I don't tend to make rigorous comparisons much beyond "like/don't like" but I'd guess that this gives a finer result than HP5 at 1600.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 8th October 2009, 07:38 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

Thanks Andrew and Sandeha.

Andrew I take it that you are only referring to Neopan 400 with Prescysol and you haven't tried pushing it in Prescysol.

Interestingly Fuji claim that N400 and N1600 can be processed together and for the same times in presumably whatever developer the user decides on. There's a parallel here with Prescysol where as I understand it the same applies.

So what is it about the Fuji neopan range that allows the same development time for two different speeds? I suppose it could be that Fuji is actually using "marketing speak" but really saying that a compromise of a half stop extra( N1600 with real speed of 650 compared to N400 with a true speed of 400) means that the same development time produces acceptable negs in both films, even if it isn't quite ideal.

Then we move onto Prescysol where if I have understood the info correctly, all films at all speeds have the same development time. Is this a peculiarity of all staining developers or is there something different and maybe unique about Prescysol which gives it this real advantage?

Certainly it avoids the impossibility of squaring the 35mm circle in zone terms by N-,N and N+ times depending on subject brightness range and all on the same roll but this leads on to a whole new subject and probably more properly belongs to the Prescysol thread.

Nice shot of the bike museum at 1600 Sandeha. I have been there and thoroughly enjoyed it, having been a keen cyclist in my mid teens nearly 50 years ago when it was Anquetil v. Poulidor and all the bikes and riders were monochrome :.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 9th October 2009, 09:30 AM
Andrew Bartram's Avatar
Andrew Bartram Andrew Bartram is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Warboys, on the edge of the Cambrideshire Fens
Posts: 522
Default

Mike

I've only ever used film at or below the manufacurers recommended speeds.
Whilst not a zone system user I do monitor my contact prints closely, print them for max black on the rebates and then judge other tones against this. If overall too light then this suggests neg a bit on the thin side so move from say 400 to 200 and see what happens next time.

As for prescysol Peter Hogan's web site gives much more info. He does say that zone system users may still wish to tweak times in the dev but to be honest 10.5 mins partial stand works pretty well fo all films I've tried.

Regards

Andrew
__________________
Fenland Camera and Darkroom (Affordable Workshops)
Reply With Quote
Reply
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Perceptol Formula pentaxpete Chemical formulae 49 25th December 2018 07:29 PM
Primates, Perceptol and D3200 Mike O'Pray Monochrome Film 7 31st March 2009 02:10 PM
Neopan 400 Clearance Andrew Bartram Monochrome Film 12 30th March 2009 07:14 PM
DDX at 1+9 - Development Times Mike O'Pray Monochrome Film 11 29th March 2009 08:19 AM
Is Fuji Neopan T-Grain or not? Argentum Monochrome Film 4 6th October 2008 03:52 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.