Efke 8x10 : QC still a problem?

[G Benaim]

Hi all,

I'm about to get some more 8x10 film from freestyle, and was considering getting some efke to try, but have read lots of posts re qc problems w the sheet film. Is this still the case, or have all the problems been sorted out? Has anyone recently bought efke 8x10 from freestyle and gotten bad film? Thanks,

GB

[Michael Kadillak]

Hi all,

I'm about to get some more 8x10 film from freestyle, and was considering getting some efke to try, but have read lots of posts re qc problems w the sheet film. Is this still the case, or have all the problems been sorted out? Has anyone recently bought efke 8x10 from freestyle and gotten bad film? Thanks,

GB

What film are you currently using and where is it falling short to cause you to want to go this direction? If it is because of the fact that it is cheaper then I would simply state the facts with Efke. I have been told that the coating machines were built in the 1950's and the staff that runs the factory is relatively small. In the life cycle of a business it is clearly on the final turn.

If you are shooting 8x10 then clearly you are serious about image making. My advice would be to purchase the highest quality modern emulsions available and stay the course. In this regard I would highly recommend FP4+ and/or TMY. The time you allocate to learning how to use these marvelous emulsions will be time well spent because there will be zero worries about qualty control and you will never have to make another exposure to cover what you cannot possibly control.

I learned my lesson tha hard way as there is nothing quite as discouraging as finding yourself on the receiving end of the many defects that are possible and probable with Efke.

Just my $0.02

[tim atherton]

There are some who seem to have perennial problems with Efke film. There are also one or two who seem to have a continual war of attrition against Efke, sniping away whenever it's mentioned - though thankfully not on this list (most of the time I would take the comments on some other lists on this issue with a huge pinch of salt...).

Speaking personally, I have used both Adox and Efke PL100 in 4x5 and 8x10. Maybe 20 boxes of 4x5 and 15 boxes of 8x10 in the last 18 months.

I recently went through 5 boxes of 8x10 over the last couple of months

I haven't experienced any of the defects that a smallish number of people seem to mention.

No "debris" embedded in it, no missing notches, no banding (and I've been doing a certain amount of stuff with big skies, where you would expect it to show up).

The only problems I have had have been due to my own klutziness during processing - it is a little delicate, but I find it's really no easier to scratch when processing than say Tri-X or HP5.

I should add, this has simply been my experience.

(I have, however, recently had a box of Ilford FP4 8x10 that had thumbprints etched in the emulsion from the factory... so you never know what you'll get).

I also happen to use it because I really like the film and the feel and look it has processed in Pyrocat.

I like HP5 for some things, I dislike T-Max for the same reasons most other people seem to dislike it (what I would call it's "characterlessness" - [let the flames begin ])

I happen to personally really like the look of Efke 100, which is different from most other emulsions I have tried (as Tri-X is different from HP5 etc etc)

[G Benaim]

Michael,

The reason for wanting to try it is I've heard very good things about how it looks and how it you can increase contrast beyond N+1 for low contrast scenes. It's actually more expensive than the foma I've been using.

Tim,

Is there better qc w the adox over the efke, as far as you know? Where have you gotten your film? Thanks,

GB

[tim atherton]

Sorry, that was when J&C was selling it under the Adox name - it was all trademarks and distributors etc... (I've lost track of where the Adox/Efke thing is now)

The last xx batches over the last year or so I've got from Freestyle

[davidb]

I tried efke PL100 in 4x5 and found it soft and had some marks on the film. Sure it's a nice film but is it worth taking a chance?

[scott_6029]

I really like the film and have had no quality control problems to date. As far as expansion capability, I have not found it to be the best film for this. Perhaps others have.

[Michael Kadillak]

Michael,

The reason for wanting to try it is I've heard very good things about how it looks and how it you can increase contrast beyond N+1 for low contrast scenes. It's actually more expensive than the foma I've been using.

Tim,

Is there better qc w the adox over the efke, as far as you know? Where have you gotten your film? Thanks,

GB

My film curves with PL100 are as you said, very consistent with a film that expands but comparing apples to apples it does not hold a candle to T Max 400 as a film that will expand. TMY will build density to the moon as the film curve simply does not turn down.

When I hear people say that they cannot get expressive prints out of T Max 400 I say that they are not doing someting as optimally as they could because I honestly believe that it is the best film that is currently available. And when Kodak improves the grains structure to match a 200 speed film while maintaining it 400 ASA very soon, it could even get better. No, it will probably not really necessary for contact printers but small and medium format shooters should have a smile on their face. Kodak would not be spending money on R&D if they were not attempting to stay in the game.

Personally I feel that using the absolute best film available for as long as it can be purchased is a good investment in your photographic journey. I buy FP4+ and TMY and would purchase Fuji film if they made a good B&W emulsion. If the Chinese or the Russians made the best film I would purchase that in a country minute.

At the end of the day it is about making expressive photographs - nothing more...

[David A. Goldfarb]

Some of us just don't care for TMY. It's not strictly a density issue. The spectral sensitivity of TMY is different from other films, and it's just not to my taste. If it appeals to you, de gustibus non disputandem est, as they say.

[Alex Hawley]

At the end of the day it is about making expressive photographs - nothing more...

My feelings are very similar to Michael's. I'm one of the "small few" who was struck by the Efke QC problems. Took me a long time and several potentially excellent photos to figure out that the glitches in the negatives were beyond my control. I initially had very good results from PL 100 but after the first few sheets in the box, it went to Hell. So from now on its FP4 and TMY and I ain't lookin' back.