I'm about to try this combination, and am looking for a development time. I'm expecting to find an EI of around 640. I like shadow detail. I realise that PMK is not a developer for pushing. I use it with Neopan 400 at ei200, and I like the results very much for portraiture. I'm looking for a bit more speed (maybe 1.5 stops more)

In Hutchings Book of Pyro he lists for "Fuji Neopan 800" a time of 12min@70F for ei800 and 12min@80F for ei1600.

Since there isn't a Neopan 800, is this actually a recommendation for developing Neopan 1600?

-- john stockdale (jo.sto@bigpond.com), November 24, 2001

Answers

Fuji's published curves for Neopan 400 and 1600 look almost identical to me. There's certainly not 2 stops difference between them. Both films begin to toe at just under 10^-3 lux-seconds, by Fuji's own data, so I don't think that '1600' (cough, cough!) will give you any more noticeable shadow detail than 400.
Ilford Delta 3200 and Kodak T-Max 3200 are both genuinely faster than 400 ISO, perhaps giving a real 1200 ISO speed.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), November 26, 2001.

I'm quoting from memory, so I might be wrong: 'The Film Developing Cookbook' states the real speed of Neopan 1600 seems to be around 650 :( I was looking for a traditional fast film, as I dislike more and more fast T grain films, and was greatly disappointed.

This being said, I developed a good deal of Neopan 1600 (35 mm) at the speed of 1600 with good results. Might be a keeper after all.

The massive Dev Chart gives for Neopan 1600 at 1600 in PMK (1+2+100 12 min at 20°C.

-- Xavier (xcolmant@powerir.com), November 26, 2001.

The little bit of Neopan 1600 that I've done in PMK was exposed at 800 and developed 10 minutes at 70F. I found I preferred the results of HP5+ exposed at 800 and developed in more "regular" developers, so haven't used the Neopan 1600 much.

-- Kip Babington (cbabing3@swbell.net), November 28, 2001.

John, I was thinking about trying some Neopan 1600 @640 in PKM when I came across your post. Wonder if you tried it, and how it came out. It would seem ideal for producing lots of shadow detail and preventing burnout of the high lights, with good sharpness. I don't care how much grain it shows. (I've only tried it at 1600 in Rodinal and TMax, and there's no shadow detail.) Thanks. Bill

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@comcast.net), May 15, 2002.

John, have you tried Delta 400 (new) in PMK? I don't know that you'd get quite 640, but I conservatively rate it at 320 (12'@70 PMK). It has outstanding shadow detail, and I'd say it's a safe bet you could squeeze another 2/3 and maybe a whole stop out of it without sacrificing too much shadow detail.

-- Ted Kaufman (writercrmp@aol.com), May 15, 2002.

No, Ted, I haven't tried new Delta 400 yet.

Bill, not quite yet. One of the posters above mentioned the published curves for Neopan 1600 on the Fuji web site. (www.fujifilm.com then >professional film>b&w)

I compared the curves for Neopan 400 to Neopan 1600. It appears that the 1600 film is 2/3 of one stop faster than the Neopan 400 if you measure it by foot speed, i.e. around Zone 1. The film seems to be optimised for pushing: you will see that the contrast rolls off at higher densities, making it ideal for pushing without blowing out highlights.

Now I have found Neopan 400 to be about 160 in PMK. This seems very low, but I've found HP5+ in PMK to be significantly faster (no measurements but much denser for the same exposure, same subject, same day- not very scientific but the difference was obvious)

This might lead me to expect neopan 1600 in PMK to be about 160 + 2/3 stop = 250 which is equal to or slower than HP5+ in PMK. So I wouldn't choose it for speed. I probably wouldn't choose it for other general photography unless I wanted to control (reduce) highlight contrast.

Having said that, I have a roll and I've just finished my annual tax ritual and consequently feel somewhat energized. So I'll try it in the next few days on a wide range of subjects and see how it goes. I'll set its speed at 650 and do + and - 1 stop bracketting.

I'll let you know how it goes.

-- john stockdale (jo.sto@bigpond.com), May 15, 2002.