 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / November 2004Agfapan 25
I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an alternative would be better than stuffing my freezer with film. I've seen that Agfa makes a 25 speed B&W film for the Minox format. If this film were to be produced in 35mm and/or 120, how good of a substitute would it be for Tech Pan. Also, is it any good to begin with? Thanks > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > would it be for Tech Pan. Also, is it any good to begin with? > Thanks The film to which you refer is only called Agfapan when it's spooled by Minox for their 8x11 format; it includes a special low contrast developer. Otherwise, it's called Copex microfilm, and is available in 16 mm unperforated, 35 mm camera perforated, and sheets, but not 120. The easiest way to obtain it in less than literally thousands of feet in a lot is as Gigabitfilm, which also includes an optimized developer that gives. There is also Bluefire Police, which is Copex Rapid and gives effectively the same result at EI 80-100. Neither, however, has the extended red sensitivity of Tech Pan.  SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. Donald is an highly reliable source, but this information is not correct. Yes, Minopan 25 is Agfapan 25. But it is not a microfilm. Although Agfa discontinued their Agfapan 25 film about two years ago, Minox has a considerable stockpile and will probably continue offering Minopan 25 for years. It is processed in standard developers like Rodinal, D-76, etc. It is not a substitute for Technical Pan since it is much grainier. Tech Pan is, in essence, a microfilm, albiet a modified one, which is why it needs special development. Agfa will not re-commence making Agfapan 25. The best substitute for it is Maco UP25, which should continue to be available for the forseeable future. The other films mentioned (Copex and Bluefire Police) are microfilms which must be processed in an extremely soft developer in order to achieve pictorial contrast. Both are less grainy than TMax 100, which is currently the low-grain champ of the standard film world, and both have more conventional tonalities when correctly processed. As Donald noted, 35mm Gigabit is Copex Rapid Pan AHU. Gigabit in sheet film sizes is a different Agfa microfilm. Bluefire Police is often said to be Copex Rapid Pan AHU, but it is not. When given identical exposure in a sensitometer, and processed together in Bluefire HR developer, they develop quite differently. In twelve minutes of continuous agitation, Copex develops to gamma 0.33, while Bluefire Police develops to gamma 0.48. Copex has a more abrupt shoulder, Bluefire Police a more abrupt toe. Their speeds are about the same, but Bluefire Police is a little faster. The emulsion colors of the two films are noticeably different. I have tried to find out what Bluefire Police is, but I have only been told is an Agfa microfilm not available outside Europe. Nothing more specific. David Foy http://www.bluefire.ca steven.sawyer@banet.net wrote: > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > would it be for Tech Pan. Also, is it any good to begin with? > Thanks The film to which you refer is only called Agfapan when it's spooled by Minox for their 8x11 format; it includes a special low contrast developer. Otherwise, it's called Copex microfilm, and is available in 16 mm unperforated, 35 mm camera perforated, and sheets, but not 120. The easiest way to obtain it in less than literally thousands of feet in a lot is as Gigabitfilm, which also includes an optimized developer that gives. There is also Bluefire Police, which is Copex Rapid and gives effectively the same result at EI 80-100. Neither, however, has the extended red sensitivity of Tech Pan. SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. > The other films mentioned (Copex and Bluefire Police) are microfilms which > must be processed in an extremely soft developer in order to achieve [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > David Foy > http://www.bluefire.ca Mr. Foy, Any possibility we might see either of these microfilm products on a 120 spool? Bear in mind that the existing stocks of Tech Pan are due to exhaust in the next six months. >> The other films mentioned (Copex and Bluefire Police) are microfilms which >> must be processed in an extremely soft developer in order to achieve [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> David Foy >> http://www.bluefire.ca > Mr. Foy, > Any possibility we might see either of these microfilm products on a 120 spool? > Bear in mind that the existing stocks of Tech Pan are due to exhaust in the next > six months. Well, I'm not Mr. Foy, nor do I sell any film, but FWIW: Films like Gigabit or Bluefire are, to my knowlege, based on microfilm emulsions like Agfa Copex Rapid, as mentioned by Mr. Foy. Microfilm is manufactured only in a few standard-sizes: 16mm unperforated 35mm unperforated 35mm perforated 105mm unperf (?). and 105mm x 148mm - Fiche. Copex Rapid is Agfas "fast" microfilm, and is only available in 16 and 35mm. So the only possibility to get Copex Rapid (and therefor Gigabit and other products based on it) in 120 would be to special order this emulsion by Agfa, which would be $$$ and the minimum order is huge. This is most propably the reason why Gigabit sheet-film is another emulsion than the 35mm perf. Agfa offers a "medium" speed microfilm - Agfa Copex HDP - which is said to have even finer grain as Copex Rapid, but is much slower. Copex HDP however is sold in 105mmx61m rolls. So here it may be possible to cut size 120 (which is about 61mm wide). And you would have some leftover to cut 127 or 16mm or Minox size from. I don't think this would be an option as the result would be much slower than Gigabit or Bluefire, I would guess about ASA 20... or less. For information on Agfa microfilm and available sizes: http://www.agfa.com/mds/microfilm/consumables/sourcedoc/assortment.html just my 0.02Euro Christian > Microfilm is manufactured only in a few standard-sizes: > 16mm unperforated > 35mm unperforated > 35mm perforated > 105mm unperf (?). > and 105mm x 148mm - Fiche. What sort of film holder would you use for the 105x148mm film? Would it be possible to mate this up to a 2x3 Graflex for instance? Seems like it should work. >> Microfilm is manufactured only in a few standard-sizes: >> 16mm unperforated >> 35mm unperforated >> 35mm perforated >> 105mm unperf (?). >> and 105mm x 148mm - Fiche. > What sort of film holder would you use for the 105x148mm film? Would it be possible > to mate this up to a 2x3 Graflex for instance? Seems like it should work. Well, 105x148mm is a bit larger than 4x5", so it has to be cut to size anyway. Christian > Donald is an highly reliable source, but this information is not correct. > Yes, Minopan 25 is Agfapan 25. But it is not a microfilm. [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > effectively the same result at EI 80-100. Neither, however, has the > extended red sensitivity of Tech Pan. Bluefire Police is actually made in Canada by Adox Fotowerke Inc, based in Calgary Alberta, try www.adox.net for details. W > Bluefire Police is actually made in Canada by Adox Fotowerke Inc, based > in Calgary Alberta, try www.adox.net for details. > > W I believe that's Mr. Foy's own brand name. I doubt the stuff is made in Canada. > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Hmmmm...I read the entire website, and it says pretty clearly that it's made in Canada. One page gives a pretty detailed explanation of the trademark / vs / domain name / vs / company history etc. cheers Signatureregards from :: John Bartley 43 Norway Spruce Street Stittsville, Ontario Canada, K2S1P5 ( If you slow down it takes longer - does that apply to life also?) That's Foy's site and he just told you that the film's supposed to be an Agfa product. He might be spooling from bulk rolls in Canada. That would make more sense. > >>Bluefire Police is actually made in Canada by Adox Fotowerke Inc, based > >>in Calgary Alberta, try www.adox.net for details. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > ( If you slow down it takes longer > - does that apply to life also?) >That's Foy's site and he just told you that the film's supposed to be an Agfa >product. He might be spooling from bulk rolls in Canada. That would make more >sense. "Today, the Adox products you see on these pages are engineered and brought to market in the same spirit of ground-breaking innovation that animated the original company. They are Canadian products sold in Canada through dealers, distributors, and Internet retailers. Due to potential trademark conflicts, the company's products are presently sold worldwide without the Adox name and logo (see below)." Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Next time vote "No!" for the status quo and vote 3rd party !! F O U R M O R E F R E A K I N ' Y E A R S ! ! ! >Agfa will not re-commence making Agfapan 25. The best substitute for it is >Maco UP25, which should continue to be available for the forseeable future. Efke 25 isn't bad, either. > >Agfa will not re-commence making Agfapan 25. The best substitute for it is > >Maco UP25, which should continue to be available for the forseeable future. > > Efke 25 isn't bad, either. Maco 25 and Efke 25 are the same film made in Croatia by Fotokemika. Efke packages their 25 film for Maco in Maco boxes at their factory. In addition, Maco UP64+ is Efke 50 and Maco UP100+ is Efke 100. Maco has no coating facilities, all of their films and papers are made by other firms. The Maco Infrared, Ort 25, PO100, TP64, and Genius films are also made for them by Fotokemika (Efke). >Donald is an highly reliable source, but this information is not correct. >Yes, Minopan 25 is Agfapan 25. But it is not a microfilm. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Agfa will not re-commence making Agfapan 25. The best substitute for it is >Maco UP25 You are correct in all of the above information of course. I have 20 rolls of 120 left and 2 children to shoot them on. IMO APX25 was simply the most beautiful film ever produced. I found Zone VI's PQ developer to work great with it. As far as Tech Pan, I really like the Formularies (Bill Troops') TD-3 developer. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Next time vote "No! for the status quo and vote 3rd party !! > IMO APX25 was simply the most beautiful film ever produced. Interesting. I've heard this often about APX25, KB14 (KB25), PAN-X, and PAN-F, occasionaly about Plus-X, rarely about TRI-X and NEVER about T-MAX or the chromgenic (XP-1/XP-2, etc) films. Makes you wonder, doesn't it? Geoff. SignatureGeoffrey S. Mendelson, C.T.O. GW&T Ltd., Jerusalem Israel gsm@mendelson.com gsm@gwandt.com IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com> wrote John wrote: > > IMO APX25 was simply the most beautiful film ever produced. > > Interesting. I've heard this often about APX25, KB14 (KB25), PAN-X, and PAN-F, > occasionaly about Plus-X [let me guess, only about the sheet film, ed.], > rarely about TRI-X and NEVER about T-MAX or the chromgenic (XP-1/XP-2, etc) films. You will hear it about T-Max when it, too, is no longer made. I still have some 18 rolls (? Pro/Press pack - 2 rolls) of APX25 in the freezer. Pretty ho-hum stuff, IMO. However, most of my freezer is filled with Kodachrome and Tech Pan -- "simply the most beautiful films ever produced". -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ >Bluefire Police is often said to be Copex Rapid Pan AHU, but it is not. When >given identical exposure in a sensitometer, and processed together in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >David Foy >http://www.bluefire.ca Not sure whether this post is actually from David Foy, given the fact that there's no real name on the post. If it is, he should have remembered what he posted on photo.net in October, 2003: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004JAv >David Foy , oct 08, 2003; 10:45 a.m. >Disclaimer: I am the person who makes and sells these products. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >David Foy I certainly hope this helps to clear up any confusion. --Greg -------------------------------------------------------------- Greg Mikol This email address is registered with the Washington State Attorney General's office and WAISP. Unsolicited Commercial Email sent to this address in violation of RCW 19.190.020 is subject to civil penalties of $500 per offense. > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an > alternative would be better than stuffing my freezer with film. I've > seen that Agfa makes a 25 speed B&W film for the Minox format. If this > film were to be produced in 35mm and/or 120, how good of a substitute > would it be for Tech Pan. Also, is it any good to begin with? Agfapan APX 25 has been discontinued a long time ago... What is sold as Minox Agfapan 25 has been produced several years ago. Christian > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > would it be for Tech Pan. Also, is it any good to begin with? > Thanks There simply is no substitute for Tech Pan. There is no film that is it's equal. No conventional film can match the granularity of Tech Pan. Tech Pan, as opposed to other pictorial films, had an emulsion composed of silver halide crystals nearly all the same size. This is what gave it both it's exceptionally fine grain and high contrast characteristics. A POTA developer was thus the only developer that could produce normal contrast. APX 25 was a good film, but also grainier, since as a conventional pictorial film it contained a mix of both larger and small crystals. A t-grain film is probably about as close as you'll come, but can't equal Tech Pan. > > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > A t-grain film is probably about as close as you'll > come, but can't equal Tech Pan. Frankly, I'm not looking for a film with the same "look" as Tech Pan, but just with the same granularity. I'm sure Kodak could make a T-Max 25 if they wanted to, but they're not about to do that, so I have to scrounge around other makes to find something similar. TMX to me has visibly more grain than Tech Pan . > Frankly, I'm not looking for a film with the same "look" as Tech Pan, but > just with the same granularity. I'm sure Kodak could make a T-Max 25 if [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > than > Tech Pan . If what you need is mainly grainlessness, and not high resolution, you might consider a C-41 black-and-white film. OP wrote: > > Frankly, I'm not looking for a film with the same "look" as Tech Pan, but > > just with the same granularity. ... TMX to me has visibly more grain > > than Tech Pan. Are you sure? Grain-wise I can not tell TMX in Microdol-X Vs TP/Technidol when looking at a uniform grey area. With 16x enlargements I need to view at closer than 6" to see any grain. Close up TMX/MX-1:3 shows a sharp salt & pepper grain that looks better than MX-FS and TP. Resolution with TMAX/M-X is the same at F.S. and at 1:3. Resolution is a different kettle of fish: When there is detail the TechPan looks far smoother. A step tablet at 50' when printed at 16x shows well delineated steps with TP and is a smudge with TMX in MX. The steps are far larger than the resolution limit. The improved low contrast MTF of TechPan may be the reason its 'large format' look. Tests were of an Air force target and a Kodak 'Color Separation Guide/Grey Scale'. Taken at 50ft. Micro Nikkor 55mm @ f8. Nikon F-3, critical magnifier, MLU, Gitzo Pro Studex, overcast day, no wind. Resolutions were: TMX/MX-FS 60 lp/mm TMX/MX-1:3 75 lp/mm TP/Technidol 120 lp/mm As measured with a loupe on 16x RC prints, 50/2.8 El Nikkor @f8. > > I'm sure Kodak could make a T-Max 25 if they wanted to They don't want to. If enough folks used TP to make it wildly popular then they would. We have only ourselves to blame for TP's (and K25's) demise. SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ > > > I'm sure Kodak could make a T-Max 25 if they wanted to > > They don't want to. Agreed > If enough folks used TP to make it wildly popular then they would. > > We have only ourselves to blame for TP's (and K25's) demise. I don't know if I agree there. I never read anywhere that Kodak claimed they weren't making a reasonable margin on the film, but that some of the ingredients became "obsolete". Often suppliers make concious decisions to pull out of profitable products for some sort of streamlining objective or even for political/union issues. There has been some discussion that Kodak and other film makes are poised to release a whole new generation of film products that would blow TP away. The theory goes that this new "generation" of products has already been developed and has yet to be manufactured. I find this hard to believe. What I find easier to believe is outfits like the makers of Gigabit, Bluefire Police and other microfilm stocks moving into the TP market and making a whole lot of money. I would be happy with this if they would just produce it in a 120 size. : > > > I'm sure Kodak could make a T-Max 25 if they wanted to : > : > They don't want to. : Agreed : > If enough folks used TP to make it wildly popular then they would. : > : > We have only ourselves to blame for TP's (and K25's) demise. : I don't know if I agree there. I never read anywhere that Kodak claimed they : weren't making a reasonable margin on the film, but that some of the ingredients [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] : lot of money. I would be happy with this if they would just produce it in a 120 : size. The reason that Kodak dropped the film was they weren't selling enough of it to make it worth their while to make it work with a new base. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > > > I'm still reeling from the Kodak Tech Pan decision as I'm sure many of > > > you are. I've been doing a small stocking up but of course an [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > other makes to find something similar. TMX to me has visibly more grain than > Tech Pan . I've always used it with rodinal, which isn't exactly a fine grained developer. But the t grain still remains pretty fine in large format. D76 or Microdol-X should give pretty fine grain with TMX 35mm. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.