A lot of the discussions here have been about available light, getting that ever slower shutter speed, and the results seen here have been extremely pleasing, but all this requires the use of fast film, which tends to be grainy when enlarged.

Does anyone use Kodak Technical Pan Film (ASA 25)? The slowest film on the market. (Is there anything slower?)

Tech Pan film costs $7-$8 for a roll of 36, versus $2-$3 for T-Max film (ASA 100 to 400), (source = www.bhphoto.com), but the quality of enlargements is supposed to be the most grain-free of commercially available film. Since some people (myself included) like to shoot B&W in good light, with the possibility of enlarged photographs, I was wondering if anyone has had experience with this film (or similar ones from other manufacturers), before investing $7 a roll.

This film also requires different processing chemicals (so they say in the the pdf files at www.kodak.com), so I also would like to know if there are any particular nuances to watch out for while doing home development.

Thanks in advance.

PS. I hope I didn't mix up ISO with ASA, if so please correct me, since I'm not familiar with the term ISO.

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), February 01, 2002

Answers

I think with the fine-grain B&W films you have to be very critical in development to get the desired "grainless" effect. I use to shoot with Agfa APX25 and develop in Rodinal. That's the limit of my experience.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

I pretty much quit using black and white film since I stopped going to black and white movies. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate good use of it by others. I went to Salgado's exhibit in Berkeley a couple of weeks ago. Erwin Puts claims, in one of his recent newsletters, that Tmax 100 is by his tests the best, most grainless film he has tested. I believe he rated it at 80. Cheers.

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

FWIW, Ilford Delta 400 is an ISO 100/21 film. The "100" part of "100/21" corresponds to the old ASA designations schema and the "21" part corresponds to the old DIN schema. Most people drop the DIN part of the ISO designation, so you se people talking about "ISO 100" film, same thing as "ISO 100/21", same as "ASA 100" (which nobody uses anymore), samething as "DIN 21" (which also isn't used anymore). The ASA people didn't want to give up there scheme, neither did the DIN folks, so ISO just combined them (also retains backward compatibility).

-- Ron Buchanan (ronb@fusive.com), February 01, 2002.

I use Agfa APX25 (still have a couple/three dozen rolls of it) and Ilford Pan F Plus most of the time. I've used Tech Pan but it is fussy on exposure and processing ... I get much more consistent results with the above two films and not much more grain.

Some of the best Minox work I've seen was done on Tech Pan in highly dilute Rodinal, spiked with a little sodium sulfite. Very very fine grain, and decent mid-tone rendition.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), February 01, 2002.

CORRECTION: FWIW, Ilford Delta 100 is an ISO 100/21° film.

Sorry about that, but the rest stands.

-- Ron Buchanan (ronb@fusive.com), February 01, 2002.

Hello Vikram-

I'm certainly not an authority about the endless variety of film/developer combinations. But remember there are some good fine grain developers available. With proper agitation, you should be able to get some very good results. Ilford makes Microphen, Perceptol and Ilfotec HC. Which I'm told is the same thing as Kodak's HC-110. Which for what its worth was one of Ansel Adam's favorites. You might want to consult his book "The Negative". It is not just about large format and zone system stuff. He has some great information on small tank developing techniques, i.e. developers, dilutions, agitation techniques and compensation.

Personally, I think too much is made of Tmax and Delta films. Ilford's FP4+ (ISO 125)is remarkably fine grained to my eye.

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

Hello Vikram,

Techpan is very fine grain, and high resolution 320 lpmm. You can enlarge to 25x with no visible grains. I buy Techpan not by 35 exp roll, but by 150' bulk, then cut them into Minox size roll film-- for my Minox cameras. The negative is only 8x11mm size, easily enlarge to 8x10", equivalent to 35mm negative enlarge to 24x36" poster size. I also use Agfapan APX 25, not as fine grain as Technical Pan.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@sympatico.ca), February 01, 2002.

Vikram,

Sooner or later, every B&W 35mm photographer starts toying with the idea of TechPan. It is the finest grained B&W film of all, but be warned (IMHO) it is very processing sensitive, even when processed in Technidol, the developer that goes with it, as it tends to get contrasty quite easily. For my money, I've been perfectly happy with Delta 100 and XP2/TCN400. The tradeoff in grain is worth the cost savings, and the latitude in processing, for most enlargements.

If you are really looking for grain free, smooth tonalities, consider going to medium format.

As for nuances in home development, again I'm no expert, but I found that I had to follow agitation instructions, times, and temperatures exactly. Even so, I got somewhat contrasty negs, as I found it hard to master the precise agitation needed.

But don't let all this scare you off-give it a whirl!

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 01, 2002.

I should have mentioned these websites: Digitaltruth Click on the Massive Dev Chart for your film. Amazing.

Also .

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

Sorry, the other website is: http://www.unblinkingeye.com

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

I, too, love richly detailed, virtually grainless images for many applications. However, the use of an ISO 25 film is often just not practical for anything but photos in good light and/or the ability to use a tripod for the whole roll.

As mentioned by others, TechPan is fussy about proper exposure, and is generally considered to be a pain to develop properly. It is not intended as a general purpose film, but rather for controlled, technical applications. The real speed of the film is perhaps closer to ISO 16, instead of 25. This is, in part, due to the fact that the ISO film rating process calls for a specific set of circumstances that often don't match practical use of the films. That is why many people rate films at something other than the stated ISO rating. Ilford, for example, also makes comments about some of its films in the data sheets as to exposure recommendations that differ from the stated ISO rating of the film.

For fine grain results, you may be better served by using a slightly higher-speed film in combination with one the various fine-grain developers. Rodinal, by the way, is not a fine-grain developer, but rather a high-accutance developer. The high-accutance characteristic can result in sharper looking images, but at the sacrifice of slightly higher grain. Pointing to Ilford's data sheets again, they often make different recommendations for "finest grain" versus best speed, etc.

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), February 01, 2002.

Once again, I agree with Mr. Barker. Vikram, Ilford's website is easy to navigate and they have PDF files available for their films, Pan F, FP4...as Ralph mentioned, you should be able to find comparisons there regarding finest grain vs. sharpness...

Try Ilford.com

-- jeff (debonetkou@yahoo.com), February 01, 2002.

In my very limited experience, Fuji Acros appears to be close to an ISO 25 film.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), February 01, 2002.

BTW, Vikram ASA=American Standards Association. Nowadays, ISO=International Standards Organization film speed ratings are used. But aside from the acronym, the two rating scales are identical.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 01, 2002.

I'd look for a film that's readily available in your area and stick with it. Use a one shot liquid developper. Accept the fact that for big enlargements you need big negatives, unless you can live with a choppy look of your work. Smooth tonality is medium or large format territory, the speed of your 35mm film has nothing to do with that aspect of the final print.

Use a tripod if you want sharp stuff on your wall.

Enlargements up to say 9x6" from 35mm can still be very pleasing,even from TriX developped in D76 1:1 (I use 1:2). Tmax100 has flatter internal contrast which improves if you develop at a higher temp. e.g. 75F (John Sexton). I use it with Rodinal 1:85, @ 75F if I shoot scenics, not for grab/action stuff.

I'd be careful to get hooked on a film from a manufacturer that has established a reputation of discontinuing products regularly.

Leica reps used to boast big enlargements from postage stamp size negs, in the days that most Leica nuts did their own processing. They would shoot a portrait of some member of the audience and quickly process it for the public to see: they appeared sharp in part because they used a very contrasty lighting set-up. Tonality, gradation was not important for the sales pitch.

I would be reluctant to concentrate on exotic or special purpose films, you'll spend too much time testing.

-- Hans Berkhout (berkhout@cadvision.com), February 01, 2002.

Gentlemen,

Thank you all for your collective wisdom in this area. I'll experiment with some different films that I bought, and keep your advice in mind.

Regards,

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), February 01, 2002.

I've gotten great results with tech pan and a 50mmDR. Much less harsh results than current lenses and the resolution is wonderful.Great developers available from photographers formulary...much better than tech pan developer.Great film if used right.

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), February 02, 2002.

Vikram,

Try Technical pan, it's a wonderful film. I use it for portraiture and I hope that kodak will continue to product this film.

I use the film at 25 ISO and for devloppement I use technidol (20°C / 11 mn). The procedure is a bit different from other film, intensive agitation (2s) every 30s.

-- bramoulle eric (mtbramo@infonie.fr), February 02, 2002.

My favourite of the last thirty years was Kodachrome 25 (dammit). Now it's probably Agfa's b/w 25.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), February 02, 2002.

My advice, for what it's worth, is forget about Tech Pan.

If you want the classic, smooth, 1950's look then find some Efke KB 25. This is the same formulation as the classic ADOX miracle film of the 1950's and it is pretty damn good even today. I find it finer grained and smoother toned than Panatomic-X was in it's heyday.

Efke is an "old technology" film with tons of silver content and responds well to Rodinal 1:50. The only problem is that there is currently no US importer, so you have to order from Europe. That's not a big deal -- just check out:

http://www.fotoimpex.de

Of course, there is also Kodochrome 25 which is still available at B&H and Adorama I believe. I stocked up on 50 rolls recently.

-- Rolfe Tessem (rolfe@ldp.com), February 02, 2002.

FWIW, I occasionally use Ektar 25, long discontinued, but it's aging halted by my freezer. Usually in my Canon F1. On a tripod. Mirror locked up. Lens stopped down. Shutter released with the self timer.

My Leicas are invariably used hand held, and why waste the sharpness of that film hand held? It's great for macro work, and scenics, thus the SLR.

-- Tom Bryant (boffin@gis.net), February 06, 2002.

I have shot hundreds of rolls of this film in 35mm and 120.The first roll was when it first came out. I wasn't overly impressed with the starknest.Tri x was my other film at the time . A few years latter i read about Ansel Adams teaching out in the desert somewhere and insisting his students shot on 35mm tech-pan.I needed to give this film a second chance.So after many many rolls in a Linhof 23b and my M6 in Vietnam,India,Indonesia,Fiji,Australia and one or two other places these are my findings. 1-i shoot at 25 iso 2- the extended red sensetivity is about the same as a mid yellow filter so if you use one of these then its the same as iso50 with a filter.I find the 100 iso films to be more like 64.So suddenly tech pan is not so slow. 3-the tonal range is very very good .I never have a problem with blocked highlights like t-max or empty shadows like all the other fine grain films. 4-low light and fine films like agfa 25 ,panatomic x and pan f do not mix well.Empty shadows every where no matter how long the exposure. Tech pan is amazing in this way. 5-when processing do a pre- wet and put the film into the dev not the dev into the tank with the film allready in it.Agitate for the first 30 sec extreamly vigorously then for 2 sec every 30 sec(not 2.5 or 1.5) Do not go and make a coffee or go to the toilet or answer the phone etc. Print in a glassless carier to avoid neuton rings. Sorry about my spelling.

-- Tim Robinson Photography (timphoto@ihug.com.au), February 15, 2002.