Many years ago I used Kodak's Panotomic X film (asa 25). I really hated when they discontinued it. How does the Tech, Pan compare. Any advice on developers, exposer index, times and temps etc? I'm mainly looking for a full range of gray negative. Not a high contrast neg. Thanks ron

-- David R. Heald (rondav1@earthlink.net), September 23, 2003

Answers

Tech pan is a bit red sensative and is contrasty. I love the stuff for the extreme definition it gives. BUT it is a bit high on the contrast. You could play with development times/tempratures or split filtering and bring it down a bit. I think you would do better with something like delta 100 for more neutral greys. It works very well at 50 and probably almost as well at 25. I was able to bring the contrast on tech pan down by processing it with normal agitation instead of recomended process. I would definately pick up a roll and some technidol to give it a try.

-- Mark Munds (mmunds@excite.com), October 11, 2003.

I assisted a fashion photographer who got into Tech Pan about 15 years ago. One of the biggest tricks is to avoid excessive edge development. Prewetting the film helps substantially and I would avoid anything but the technidol liquid developer. Something about this film gives it a beautiful tonal scale. Prints have almost a silvery feel to them.

-Chris

-- Chris Barrett (chris@hedrichblessing.com), February 19, 2004.

I shoot 35 and m/f Tech Pan at iso50 under strobes.

In my experience Technidol is dangerously high-contrast unless "worked down" for a full development cycle on waste b&w film (any will do).

But why bother. Photographer's Formulary TD-3 (http://www.photoformulary.com) gives a more reliable result at a fraction of the cost, and allows manipulation of contrast and density through different dilutions and agitations. I process 21 minutes in TD-3 using standard 50-50 dilution and agitation "B," which yields consistently beautiful long scale negatives for studio portraiture.

Tech Pan is a wonderful film - long may Kodak produce it!

John http://studiocurcio.com/

-- John Curcio (jecurcio@pacbell.net), February 20, 2004.