Continuing to indulge my enthusiasm for Pan F+ and Rodinal, I posted three new photos at the web site address below. Comments welcome. -Ollie

http://www.web-graphics.com/steinerphoto

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002

Answers

While judging from viewing scans is frought with error, it appears that your tests confirm my own impression of Pan F+/Rodinal, namely that is isn't very sharp and is excessively grainy for a low-speed film.

-- Willhelmn (bmitch@comcast.net), June 06, 2002.

On the contrary, my impression, viewing the prints, is that is sharp and fine-grained.

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

The sky in your "clouds" picture should be smooth and virtually grain- free for a film as slow as Pan F+. Instead it looks more lumpy than HP5. Pan F+ gives much better sharpness and granularity by developing in Ilfosol-S. For Rodinal, Delta 100 is a much better combination.

-- Willhelmn (bmitch@comcast.net), June 06, 2002.

Willhelmn, I do see grain in the sky of the clouds photo, but I think the main error I made here is scanning from an 11"X14" enlargement of a 35mm negative. I should make a 5"x7" print and scan it. If I understand you correctly, you have tried BOTH Rodinal and Ilfosol on Pan F+, and you prefer the Ilfosol. I have not yet tried Ilfosol, but will do so in the future. Thanks for your advice.

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

Ollie: Ilford DD-X is a nice 'compromise' developer for Pan F - less grain than Rodinal, less solvent action than Ilfosol, nice tones - esp. with Leica glass 8^)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), June 06, 2002.

For my personal taste, I could tolerate a little grain if the accutance is uncompromised. It SEEMS that 11"X14" enlargements from my Rodinal 1+25 negs have finer grain than those from negs developed in Rodinal 1+50. (I say "seems" because I haven't done a large number of 11X14s.) Maybe, given the kind of look I want, I should experiment more with the various dilutions of Rodinal in preference to trying grain solvent developers. I have an 11"X14" print of the BRIDGE photo on my web site which seems to have considerably better grain than the 11"X14" CLOUDS photo does. The former was done with Rodinal 1+25, the latter with 1+50. (As they used to say in the old Teacher's Scotch Whiskey ads: "Experience is the best teacher (and Teacher's is the best esperience!") So, I'll have better informed preferences 100 prints from now.

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 07, 2002.

Don't overlook PanF and Diafine or, if you are in Europe, Neofin Blue. While we're on the subject of PanF; why are the larger film retailers not stocking it any more? I have done business with Universal Film foe a long time. For service and variety, they are great. BUT, they just stopped carrying it: as did Adorama and B & H. Called Ilford and was told "No Problem". Something is wrong somewhere.

-- Ned Learned (ned@kajabbi.com), June 07, 2002.

Ned, I haven't had any problems buying Pan F+. B&H does stock it; I just received a brick of 10 rolls from them yesterday.

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 07, 2002.

i'd like to second andy's recommendation of pan f + ddx. i have used this pairing since ddx was introduced for all of my MF (mostly 6x9). it is quite amazing; the fine grain of tech pan with most of the tonal beauty of tri-x. give it a whirl. it zones easily too (but don't be afraid to use radical mixes!!).

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 07, 2002.

Pan-F in Ilfosol @ 1-9 for 4 minutes gives extreme sharpness and virtually grain free 16X20's.

-- Brian Harvey (bharvey423@yahoo.com), June 07, 2002.

I re-scanned the clouds photo, and I think the grain is less evident in this new scan. I also added one more Pan F+/Rodinal photo on the web site.

-- Ollie Steiner (violindevil@yahoo.com), June 08, 2002.