Classic Pan 200 was my standard film for most of last summer - I shot
somewhere around 50 rolls, 120 format. A few shots taken with it:
http://www.markcassino.com/feature.htm
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga00.htm
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga03.htm
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga04.htm
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga13.htm
http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga21.htm
I switched over to APX 100 when JandC ran out of CP200 late last year.
Ordered up another 20 rolls of the new CP200, but it seems to be subtly
different than the old (not surprising to see batch to batch variation in a
film like this.)
With proper treatment you can produce a beautiful negative with this film.
Personally, I exposed at ISO 100 (there was virtually no shadow detail at
ISO 200), developed in HC 110 Dil H for 17 minutes, with agitation only once
every 3 minutes. It brought out beautiful shadow detail while preventing
the highlights from blocking up. (Dil H is an 'unofficial dilution, 1:64 -
double the dilution of Dil B.)
I would rinse the film with water and then apply the acid stop bath - I had
a few cases of pin holes when I just dropped the acid bath in. I also used a
hardening fixer. The folks at JandC said you could go either way on
hardening it or not.
This is a very low contrast film - it's hard to factor in the agitation and
dilution aspects of the developer, but I basically was over exposing it by a
full stop and pushing the development to some degree at least. I also found
that it needed additional adjustment with filters - I got very poor shadow
detail with a #25 red filter and 3 stop exposure adjustment. With the green
filter I went to a 3 stop adjustment, more than the 2.5 stops I'd usually
do.
With the new batch of CP200 I've cut development time by 3 minutes and the
negs still look a little dense, so YMMV, as they say.
I only tried a couple of rolls of CP400 so never really got to know it. It
seemed to be comparable in many ways to CP200 (except faster.)
The biggest PITA about CP200 in 120 format is that the film is not rolled
onto the spools as well as modern films. This is the only 120 film I've used
where I would find light leaks along the edges pretty consistently. I
finally wound up bringing a black T-Shirt along with me in the field and
using it as a covering cloth when changing film - and then promptly
transferring the exposed rolls into a dark bag. Even then, a slight squeeze
to the center of the roll could result in light leaks, even in the subdued
indoor light of my basement.
And if you do use 120 film - note that JandC often neglects to put glue on
the end of the roll tag (most of the CP200 I bought this year has no glue,
last years stock did.) So you need to bring tape to tape the roll shut (a
rubber band will compress the center of the roll, push the ends out, and
cause light leaks.)
At the end of the day - with the right development of APX 100 (I'm using a
more dilute version of HC100) I find that the results are every bit as good
as CP200, and the AGFA product is much easier to handle and is a cheaper as
well... except for them going bankrupt I'd plan on using it indefinitely.
- MCC
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Loveless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow
Shel,
The propaganda at J and C suggests that their Classic Pan 200 is
similar to the old Super XX. I emailed them yesterday asking about
film that might be similar to the older, grainier Tri-X. They replied
today suggesting the Classic Pan 400. So I ordered five rolls of
each. I suppose it could just be a marketing ploy on their part, but
I'm hopeful. I'll let you, and everyone else, know how they work out
as soon as I can.
On 5/29/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I've never tried the J&C labeled films, but have used Formapan and
Bergger
(which I understand are similar). I only use water stop when I've run
out
of regular acidic stop bath - which is, essentially, never <LOL> Never
had
a problem with acidic stop bath, however, I use it diluted a little more
than called for and as a one-shot. I forget the proportions now (5 or 10
cc to 15oz water, perhaps), and I use a graduated hypodermic syringe to
add
the stop to the water.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Scott Loveless
> J and C claims their JandC Classic Pan 200 and 400 films are thick
> emulsions and high silver content. I've never tried these, but have
> been thinking about buying a few rolls to test.
>
> Going off on a tangent, have you ever had any problems using an acidic
> stop bath on thick emulsion films? Do you think a water stop would be
> a better option?
>
> On 5/29/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> > Plus-X is a modern film, relatively speaking. I use older-style
emulsions
> > most of the time with my B&W work, but they have all been modernized.
Have
> > used some of what J&C sells - Efke, and others. Still not getting
> > what
I
> > want, but will keep experimenting and trying. Thanks.
> >
> > Shel
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Scott Loveless
> > >
> > > Is it necessary to use a modern film? Plus-X, or perhaps something
> > > from JandCphoto.com, might give you that glow.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Scott Loveless
> http://www.twosixteen.com
>
> --
> "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
--
"You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
