PDA

View Full Version : New film from Begger! BERGGER Pancro 400



vinny
21-Feb-2015, 05:53
I saw this on apug. A new sheet film, hell yes! Not finding much else online about it.
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum172/138486-new-film-bergger-pancro-400-a.html

Andrew O'Neill
21-Feb-2015, 17:54
I see that it has two emulsions. One high sensitive and one low sensitive. I would be interested to learn what the advantage would be to having two emulsions. A longer scale negative? More detail captured in the shadows and highlights? I would also like to know reciprocity characteristics, and how both curves are affected. I saw its characteristic curve (PMK developer) on their FB page, but it's not a family of curves which doesn't tell me much. What do both emulsions' curves look like?
At any rate, I'm very pleased to see a new film introduced, and it will be available in sheet film, including 8x10!

Lachlan 717
21-Feb-2015, 20:31
And "Special sheet sizes will be available in the future".

esearing
22-Feb-2015, 07:12
I still have a box of Bergger 200 that I bought several years ago when it was all the rage with Pyro in BTZS tubes. Never got around to really trying it. I did expose a few sheets but never processed them. One day soon....

Jim Fitzgerald
22-Feb-2015, 08:09
I'm still shooting Bergger 200 in 14 x 17 and love the film. I'd love to try some of this in 8 x 10.

Oren Grad
22-Feb-2015, 11:03
I see that it has two emulsions. One high sensitive and one low sensitive. I would be interested to learn what the advantage would be to having two emulsions.

I think this is standard for ISO 400 films - nothing special here in that respect.

Peter De Smidt
22-Feb-2015, 14:34
Hopefully, it'll be less grainy than their 200, which was really a 100 speed film with more grain than HP5+. For small enlargements, though, it could be very beautiful.

Jim Fitzgerald
22-Feb-2015, 16:42
Hopefully, it'll be less grainy than their 200, which was really a 100 speed film with more grain than HP5+. For small enlargements, though, it could be very beautiful.

Interesting about the grain. I never found the 200 to be grainy. Then I was shooting it in 8 x 20 and 14 x 17!

Andrew O'Neill
23-Feb-2015, 13:36
I think this is standard for ISO 400 films - nothing special here in that respect.

Interesting. Thanks.

Andrew O'Neill
24-Feb-2015, 19:00
Contacted Beau Photo in Vancouver and they said that they won't be carrying it due to low Canadian dollar. Lame.

Jan Pedersen
26-Feb-2015, 19:56
Hopefully, it'll be less grainy than their 200, which was really a 100 speed film with more grain than HP5+. For small enlargements, though, it could be very beautiful.

Bergger 200 was rebadged Forte pan 200 and it was a bit grainy but nice and with an extended red sensitivity.
I might be mistaken but I don't think Bergger ever manufactured anything. Film and paper products are rebranded products made by other manufacturers, some perhaps to special specifications.

Knowing what the price differences were in the past I am certain that the new line of film will be priced in the high end of the spectrum but still it is nice to see something new.

Andrew O'Neill
26-Feb-2015, 23:27
I believe Bergger has stated that it is a brand new and original film. Whether or not they are manufacturing it themselves, is beyond me.

Roger Cole
27-Feb-2015, 05:01
They pretty much confirmed in the APUG thread that it's being coated to their specifications by Inoviscoat.

Sergio
27-Feb-2015, 09:51
From APUG
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum172/138486-new-film-bergger-pancro-400-a.html

vinny
27-Feb-2015, 09:56
I already started a thread:http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?120279-New-film-from-Begger!-BERGGER-Pancro-400&highlight=Bergger

Drew Wiley
27-Feb-2015, 10:13
It's a bit hard to read the characteristic curve because the plotting points are so large in the diagram. And things like grain rendition, edge effect, etc in relation
to popular developers will require personal testing, if someone is willing to import this film to the US. I doubt it will be a replacement for Bergger 200. Wish it
was. More likely a competitor to TMY400, but that's just a hunch. But tentatively, it looks like it will be a high quality product. There will probably have to be some favorable balance in the exchange rate before anyone risks importing any significant quantity of it. Playing that game intelligently can make or break distribution.
Meanwhile, maybe somebody can bootleg in a few boxes from Europe to test once this is available.

Sergio
27-Feb-2015, 11:25
Sorry....
admin remove please.

Andrew O'Neill
27-Feb-2015, 16:45
I'm definitely going to try and get my hands on a box.

Michael Kadillak
1-Mar-2015, 17:30
Here is to hoping that Bergger has made prudent marketing decisions with this film so that it can fall within the reasonbleness / competitive price price point. If this translates to steering clear of Freestyle then so be it. Case in point is the recent Adox II sheet film is priced $175 per 25 sheet box in 8x10 when FP4+ can be had at $120 in the same quantity and format. It is exciting if Bergger is not repackaging film this time around. Looking forward to someone sharing their experiences with this product when it becomes available.

Andrew O'Neill
1-Mar-2015, 18:33
I agree. If it is not competitive with Ilford, then I won't bother.

Michael Kadillak
1-Mar-2015, 20:04
I agree. If it is not competitive with Ilford, then I won't bother.

In a similar context I honestly believe that the TMax (2) emulsion is likely the best film that has ever been manufactured in my lifetime. Unfortunately although I know for a fact that Kodak made the financial decision to put the $1 MM into upgrading the film themselves long before the sale to Aleris (when quite honestly TMY was already bloody good). Aleris feels the need to milk the cow of deep pockets of a few "supportive" fortunate ones to use as a business standard as opposed to broader appeal. Even though I could acquiesce to this standard I feel the need to use my pocketbook as the mile marker for reasonable business practices for the long haul and cannot bridge this bid/ask spread irrespective of the temptation when there is a 2X+ difference in price. Economics and the consumer practices have allowed me to find a visual harmonic with Ilford in my work and I have been spending regularly and as easy as it has been it has also been hard. As the economics of the niche sheet film business evolves to the new demographics in play, I hope (and pray) that TMY(2) will come back to earth in price so we can enjoy its superior capabilities. At the end of the day I ask myself a simple fundamental question. Although TMY(2) is the best IMHO, it is 2X+ better than its Ilford comparable? The short answer is no. It took me a long time to arrive at this conclusion, but the facts are what they are.

Ironically, I feel that TMY(2) is so good that Alaris has essentially cut off their nose despite their face in the fact that smaller formats can illicit results comparable to what larger more formats could produce. Why then would anyone pay such a premium in larger formats? Not what I call a sustainable business model.

Andrew O'Neill
2-Mar-2015, 13:54
In a similar context I honestly believe that the TMax (2) emulsion is likely the best film that has ever been manufactured in my lifetime.

I feel the same. I used to use TMY-2 in 8x10. I loved it. It was becoming my go to film. I just can't afford it now. I'd bet if they boxed it at 25 sheets, at a price close to Ilford, it would sell like hotcakes.

Peter De Smidt
2-Mar-2015, 14:08
I agree. TMY-2 is outstanding, but I can't afford it.

Drew Wiley
2-Mar-2015, 16:38
ACROS sheet film has also gone stratospheric, even though the 120 version is a bargain. I can hardly believe that the stash of TMax 8x10 film in my freezer (both speeds) has almost tripled in price since I bought it. I find myself tempted to shoot 4x5 more frequently, rather than sacrifice the tonality of a favorite film. But Kodak color sheet film has also gone to the roof; but they've almost got a monopoly on LF color neg film now. Hard to say what they're marketing strategy is, if any, or if they're just trying to milk the cow while it's still alive. Perhaps the correct base substrates are getting very pricey due to reduced demand. Once the wind
picks up around here, FP4 is not a wise replacement for TMY, and HP5 doesn't handle high contrast anywhere near as well. But I've got lots of experience with them
both, and know what to do if push comes to shove.

Roger Cole
2-Mar-2015, 19:20
Maybe with TMY-2 so outrageously priced Ilford will consider making Delta 400 in sheets again.

Andrew O'Neill
4-Mar-2015, 13:35
Now that would be awesome!

Roger Cole
5-Mar-2015, 06:50
They did at first, at least in 4x5; I have an unopened box in my freezer, frozen since purchase though I don't and can't know how well it has kept until and unless I open it and shoot some.

Andrew O'Neill
5-Mar-2015, 09:50
I'll bet it's okay. I have a box of TMY expired in 2000 sitting in a cupboard in my darkroom. I shot a sheet in the backyard and it's fine with a wee bit of fog.

Deval
2-Apr-2015, 12:41
Looks like there is a new bw film on the block.

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum172/138486-new-film-bergger-pancro-400-a.html

Ken Lee
2-Apr-2015, 13:12
Merged with previous thread from February 2015

Tin Can
2-Apr-2015, 13:40
On a secondary FB page here, (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bergger/103979789637761#)

This is written, 'The Bergger company was begun over a century ago by French manufacturer Guilleminot. The company manufactures monochrome photographic film 35mm to 20"x24" as well as photographic paper and chemicals.'

References[edit]

Oren Grad
2-Apr-2015, 14:20
"...The company manufactures monochrome photographic film 35mm to 20"x24" as well as photographic paper and chemicals.'"

This means "The company pays contract-manufacturing houses to manufacture film, paper and chemicals that it markets."

Tin Can
2-Apr-2015, 14:27
This means "The company pays contract-manufacturing houses to manufacture film, paper and chemicals that it markets."

And?

Oren Grad
2-Apr-2015, 14:44
And?

It's possible that I've misconstrued your post; if so, my apologies. What point did you want to convey with that excerpt?

To be clear, it's OK by me if they're contracting out their manufacturing, so long as the product is of high quality and consistently available.

Taija71A
2-Apr-2015, 14:46
And?

It perhaps means... That school's starting up again (for Bergger).
Time to "Go Down the Rabbit Hole" once more.

If you watch close... History does nothing but repeat itself.

Tin Can
2-Apr-2015, 15:10
It's possible that I've misconstrued your post; if so, my apologies. What point did you want to convey with that excerpt?

To be clear, it's OK by me if they're contracting out their manufacturing, so long as the product is of high quality and consistently available.

I was interested in pointing out up to 20X24" film. I was not clear.

I was simply quoting Bergger's own source, which was linked from their FB page announcement. A paper trail as it were....

Michael Kadillak
7-Apr-2015, 06:47
I'll bet it's okay. I have a box of TMY expired in 2000 sitting in a cupboard in my darkroom. I shot a sheet in the backyard and it's fine with a wee bit of fog.

That wee bit of fog is quite honestly a good thing for two reasons. First, since the film has the ability to build density to the moon the fog does not get in the way, it just add a bit of printing time to the final product. Secondly, one can use this fog like a pre flash and I have found that I can actually get a higher effective film speed out of it. Takes a bit of getting used to, but not a bad thing at all.

David Lindquist
24-May-2015, 10:11
I got an e mail from Linhof Studio this past Friday saying that they had just received for sale Bergger Panchro 400 sheet film, 4 X 5, 5 X 7 and 8 X 10. This e mail included the statement "...based on Kodak's XX Super emulsion." (Maybe " XX Super" rather than "Super XX" resulted in translating from the French?) I can't see anything on Linhof Studio's website about this new film being "based on" Super XX, just in the e mail I got from them. Perhaps this is already general knowledge but I was not aware of it so am reporting it here.

Their price for 25 sheets of 4 X 5 is 34 GBP which converts to 52.66 USD. As of yesterday B&H in the US shows this film available from them only in 35 mm and Freestyle doesn't show it at all.

David

Oren Grad
24-May-2015, 10:28
This e mail included the statement "...based on Kodak's XX Super emulsion." (Maybe " XX Super" rather than "Super XX" resulted in translating from the French?) I can't see anything on Linhof Studio's website about this new film being "based on" Super XX, just in the e mail I got from them.

Oy... not this again.

< sigh >

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?69045-Super-XX-clone

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?10938-Boycott-digital

On past performance, I'd place very little weight on any such claims by Bergger. Run your own tests, and evaluate this new film on its own merits. Super XX is gone and is not coming back.

David Lindquist
24-May-2015, 11:41
Oy... not this again.

< sigh >

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?69045-Super-XX-clone

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?10938-Boycott-digital

On past performance, I'd place very little weight on any such claims by Bergger. Run your own tests, and evaluate this new film on its own merits. Super XX is gone and is not coming back.

I posted this also on apug and got this reply from Bergger:

"David,

It is a mistake from them since only the former BRF 200 and 400 were based on super XX emulsion.

We changed the name from BRF to Pancro because the film is really different from what you know from us.

Because Bergger is a small company, it take time for us to spread the new film worldwide. At the moment you can buy it in France, UK, Germany and Australia ... Soon, wolrdwide "

David

Anselmo DiMedici
9-Dec-2015, 21:42
As it appears info about Pancro 400 was missing in the past, i am happy to try and answer any questions as best i can, and also to point out that Pancro 400 is now readily available in the US.

warmtone
29-Feb-2016, 18:21
Great to see Bergger back!
Has anyone evaluated this new film?

peter schrager
29-Feb-2016, 19:46
still waiting....for evaluation but did see some Jaques Sturges photos taken with it...and they looked any of his other photos which is amazing...he could use a brownie camera too but the film looked nice..I think it's on their facebook page....

raspberrypatch
1-Mar-2016, 04:16
and data sheet is still outstanding

Doug Howk
1-Mar-2016, 04:51
I shot at the rated ISO, and exposures appeared fine. Developed the 4X5 sheets in Rodinal 1:25 for 8 mins in drum, and the grain is minimal even at 16X20 enlarging. I usually pre-soak the film, and was surprised when the water came out clear.
Wish it also came in 120 since I could then standardize on it.

koh303
1-Mar-2016, 05:33
and data sheet is still outstanding

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?128735-Hello-from-Bergger-USA&p=1310285&viewfull=1#post1310285

Willie
1-Mar-2016, 17:57
Will the film actually take expansion and contraction well or just sit there like the 200 speed does?

Mark Darragh
23-Jul-2016, 18:57
For anyone who is interested, David Tatnall has spent a good deal of time and effort testing and putting together a table of reciprocity data for Bergger Pancro 400.

http://thelargeformatblog.com/2016/07/06/long-exposures-using-pancro400-sheet-film-by-david-tatnall

whitemary
24-Jul-2016, 18:27
A longer scale negative? More detail captured in the shadows and highlights?
http://hautavis.net/146/o.png

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 10:00
It's almost a year since this thread started. Can anyone post some images taken with the Bergger Pancro? I'd like to see what it looks like. Thanks!

chassis
24-Feb-2017, 11:58
A search on Flickr turned up this:

https://flic.kr/p/RZBKFi

profvandegraf
24-Feb-2017, 13:34
I have been shooting a little.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/29015549363/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/32132260350/in/dateposted-public/

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 18:41
A search on Flickr turned up this:

https://flic.kr/p/RZBKFi

thanks, I did check some work over at flickr but the results seemed to vary widely. Some frames are amazing others look like xray film

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 19:00
I like the tones and resolution of those bridge shots, they came out really well. I like the look of the film. Can you say what you used as a developer etc etc?

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 19:01
I have been shooting a little.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/29015549363/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/32132260350/in/dateposted-public/

I like the tones and resolution of those bridge shots, they came out really well. I like the look of the film. Can you say what you used as a developer etc etc?

Mark Sampson
24-Feb-2017, 19:52
As Fred Picker used to write, "TRY IT". The only way to know for sure. If it's hard to find, or too expensive, then there's your answer; and you can go make pictures with whatever film you use now. I personally will guarantee that it's no magic bullet, because there is no such thing.

profvandegraf
24-Feb-2017, 20:26
I like the tones and resolution of those bridge shots, they came out really well. I like the look of the film. Can you say what you used as a developer etc etc?
Thanks, I rated the film at 320iso, processed at Dodge-Chrome Imaging, dip and dunk machine 8.5 minutes (i think, will have to check my notes), Ilford chemistry I believe. The image with leaves in it was taken over the summer on a sunny day with a Kodak Ektar 12inch lens with a red filter. The more recent (with no leaves on the trees) was shot with a 305mm G-Claron on a cloudy day with no filter. The film was scanned on a iQsmart 3 not wet mounted though.

T

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 21:50
As Fred Picker used to write, "TRY IT". The only way to know for sure. If it's hard to find, or too expensive, then there's your answer; and you can go make pictures with whatever film you use now. I personally will guarantee that it's no magic bullet, because there is no such thing.

sage advice.

Jan Normandale
24-Feb-2017, 21:51
Thanks, I rated the film at 320iso, processed at Dodge-Chrome Imaging, dip and dunk machine 8.5 minutes (i think, will have to check my notes), Ilford chemistry I believe. The image with leaves in it was taken over the summer on a sunny day with a Kodak Ektar 12inch lens with a red filter. The more recent (with no leaves on the trees) was shot with a 305mm G-Claron on a cloudy day with no filter. The film was scanned on a iQsmart 3 not wet mounted though.

T
Thanks, appreciated!

David Aimone
28-Oct-2017, 07:41
Ok, I have some problems to report with Pancro 400. I shot a box of 4x5" no problem. Recently, I purchased a box of 25 5x7" film and it appears about 6-7 within the batch were bad. There seems to be some kind of emulsion banding along the vertical dimension.

The first part of the box was shot and developed by me in Pyrocat MC, no problem. Then, I sent the last 12 sheets, all shot on the same day with the same camera and lens, to Dr5 to try their positive development. They developed 5 of the 12 and reported the problem of banding on the images, with varying intensity. They shipped those sheets back, along with the 7 undeveloped sheets. So, I developed those seven and 2 have the obvious banding, the other five don't.

After discussing lots of theories with the people at Dr5, we are guessing bad emulsion on some of the sheets in this box. Pretty much have ruled out the development processes, film holders, lens/camera and anything else in the shooting process. It could also be some sort of x-ray patterning, though that would have to have been through the USPS, and only about half of the 12 sheets show it.

What's going on? I feel I should ask Bergger for a replacement box and try again.

Not posting the images here directly (they are nudes) but here is the dropbox folder. 6 of the ones I developed with pyrocat are there, and I just scanned one of the Dr5 images. So, the Dr5 image is labeled as such; the #4 Pyro one is the one with banding. The banding is more obvious on the Dr5 due to the enhanced qualities of the positive process.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5fwitvgwtp6di9f/AABoSEgt0uie3XhegBl94Sapa?dl=0

What do you think?

David Aimone
28-Oct-2017, 07:55
I posted a second Dr5 developed image for comparison.


Ok, I have some problems to report with Pancro 400. I shot a box of 4x5" no problem. Recently, I purchased a box of 25 5x7" film and it appears about 6-7 within the batch were bad. There seems to be some kind of emulsion banding along the vertical dimension.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5fwitvgwtp6di9f/AABoSEgt0uie3XhegBl94Sapa?dl=0

What do you think?

MultiFormat Shooter
28-Oct-2017, 09:13
Thanks, I rated the film at 320iso, processed at Dodge-Chrome Imaging, dip and dunk machine 8.5 minutes (i think, will have to check my notes), Ilford chemistry I believe.

I specifically asked what developer they use and it is Ilford DD.

axs810
3-Nov-2017, 01:20
Ok, I have some problems to report with Pancro 400. I shot a box of 4x5" no problem. Recently, I purchased a box of 25 5x7" film and it appears about 6-7 within the batch were bad. There seems to be some kind of emulsion banding along the vertical dimension.

The first part of the box was shot and developed by me in Pyrocat MC, no problem. Then, I sent the last 12 sheets, all shot on the same day with the same camera and lens, to Dr5 to try their positive development. They developed 5 of the 12 and reported the problem of banding on the images, with varying intensity. They shipped those sheets back, along with the 7 undeveloped sheets. So, I developed those seven and 2 have the obvious banding, the other five don't.

After discussing lots of theories with the people at Dr5, we are guessing bad emulsion on some of the sheets in this box. Pretty much have ruled out the development processes, film holders, lens/camera and anything else in the shooting process. It could also be some sort of x-ray patterning, though that would have to have been through the USPS, and only about half of the 12 sheets show it.

What's going on? I feel I should ask Bergger for a replacement box and try again.

Not posting the images here directly (they are nudes) but here is the dropbox folder. 6 of the ones I developed with pyrocat are there, and I just scanned one of the Dr5 images. So, the Dr5 image is labeled as such; the #4 Pyro one is the one with banding. The banding is more obvious on the Dr5 due to the enhanced qualities of the positive process.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5fwitvgwtp6di9f/AABoSEgt0uie3XhegBl94Sapa?dl=0

What do you think?


I would guess xray damage but Im curious to hear others opinions...


I just bought 100 sheets of this stuff in 8x10 too :/

EH21
3-Nov-2017, 23:42
I just shot a box of the 4x5 Pancro 400 and didn't have any banding thankfully. That banding looks a lot like scanner banding that I've seen before - but I assume you have seen it in the negatives and that's not the issue?

btw - I processed my Pancro 400 shot with XTOL non diluted in a jobo for 10 mins and also with stand development with Rodinal at 1:100 for 50 mins. Haven't printed or scanned yet, but the ones with stand development are looking very good.

mathieu Bauwens
3-Nov-2017, 23:55
Hello,

I use it in 4x5 and 8x10 since the beginning, never had problems other missmanipulation from me... I've done a lot of portraits with it, some examples on my flickr, developped manually with Berspeed chemistry ; https://www.flickr.com/photos/mathieubauwens/albums/72157651990872598

paulbarden
4-Nov-2017, 10:03
Do you presoak the film? Bergger specifically states that this film needs a presoak before the developer.
I've been using the Pancro400 in 8X10 sheet format for several months and always do the recommended presoak, and have had no problems with emulsion oddities.

David Aimone
4-Nov-2017, 10:13
Yes, I presoak, and I assume Dr5 does also. There are streaks on the negative, for both my processing and theirs. But not ALL the negatives. But so far, ONLY negatives that were shipped to them and back. They didn't develop them all, sent some back undeveloped, and streaks showed up on SOME that I developed, not all. But they are there on all that they developed. So I'm thinking x-ray. I have like four more sheets here to expose and develop out of the box of 25, so we'll see what we get there. The first 8 shots out of the box that I developed before sending to Dr5 are fine.

Perhaps I should look for an x-ray proof film sleeve? Is there such a thing?


Do you presoak the film? Bergger specifically states that this film needs a presoak before the developer.
I've been using the Pancro400 in 8X10 sheet format for several months and always do the recommended presoak, and have had no problems with emulsion oddities.

Mick Fagan
4-Nov-2017, 14:13
Reply deleted.

Started to reply in the wrong thread; starting to lose my mind.

Mick.

barnacle
4-Nov-2017, 23:50
Perhaps I should look for an x-ray proof film sleeve? Is there such a thing?

Lead foil bags are certainly available, but I have a strong suspicion that when the security guy can't see through something he just cranks up his x-rays until he can... I've never in recent years won the argument about having the film boxes hand inspected and explosive sniffed only, so I've taken the (hopeful) precaution of always carrying film - exposed or not - in hand luggage, and pulling it out along with the laptop.

That way I can lay it flat on the inspection trays clear of other stuff that might emit secondary effects. Normal film emulsions are generally insensitive to x-rays (even x-ray film; it's used in a container alongside a material which fluoresces in x-rays and just catches the light) and while I don't have figures, I haven't had issues yet.

Neil

David Aimone
5-Nov-2017, 08:35
I was actually thinking more about when shipping USPS or other. That's the only place where my film could have been exposed to x-ray scanning.


Lead foil bags are certainly available, but I have a strong suspicion that when the security guy can't see through something he just cranks up his x-rays until he can... I've never in recent years won the argument about having the film boxes hand inspected and explosive sniffed only, so I've taken the (hopeful) precaution of always carrying film - exposed or not - in hand luggage, and pulling it out along with the laptop.

That way I can lay it flat on the inspection trays clear of other stuff that might emit secondary effects. Normal film emulsions are generally insensitive to x-rays (even x-ray film; it's used in a container alongside a material which fluoresces in x-rays and just catches the light) and while I don't have figures, I haven't had issues yet.

Neil

paulbarden
5-Nov-2017, 10:32
I was actually thinking more about when shipping USPS or other. That's the only place where my film could have been exposed to x-ray scanning.

I suggest you process an unexposed sheet yourself, at home, and see if you find artifacts.

David Aimone
5-Nov-2017, 10:37
capital idea!


I suggest you process an unexposed sheet yourself, at home, and see if you find artifacts.

Willie
5-Nov-2017, 13:23
Any images you guys can post here? Slow connection makes it nearly impossible to get links to come up.

David Aimone
5-Nov-2017, 14:29
171592
Any images you guys can post here? Slow connection makes it nearly impossible to get links to come up.

MartinP
5-Nov-2017, 20:16
I suggest you process an unexposed sheet yourself, at home, and see if you find artifacts.

Before trying that, I suggest giving a uniform flash to just below visible tone in order better to find the 'bad news', if there is any.

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 02:28
Reviving old thread...

I finally got around to scanning my Pancro test negatives today, one developed in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 at 20deg C 18mins (guess time which proved to be quite a bit too short, this film needs lots of time in the soup!) and another at 2:2:100 20degC for 11.5mins (a lot better density and contrast,) and on both have noticed the exact same fault as this. Faint but easily seen parallel lines running down short edge of 8x10” sheets. All four of them, all developed independently in trays.

Could this be a coating fault? Doesn’t seem like x-ray damage as looks too consistent and straight, with more abrupt edges to the bands.

This film does claim to have a special base anti-hilation layer that gives a higher than usual (compared to competition) base density. Could it be a problem with this special layer, with coating problem emphasised by pyro stain?

Anyone else seen this on Pancro or any other film?

Pere Casals
26-Apr-2019, 03:20
Reviving old thread...

I finally got around to scanning my Pancro test negatives today, one developed in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 at 20deg C 18mins (guess time which proved to be quite a bit too short, this film needs lots of time in the soup!)

Tim, if you check the MDC:

https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=%25Bergger+Pancro+400%25&Developer=%25Pyrocat%25&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C&TimeUnits=D


You will find that Panchro 400 / Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 is 17min at 24C !!!!! Not 20C...

So at 20C, time should be around 30min... for this reason development is provided at 24C, to not have a very long time.

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 03:26
Yes, this is the time Bergger sent me after I asked them if they had information via email. I tried also with the 2:2:100 dilution and that was much better. Base density / fog on both was very high.

The tones, grain and gradation of the scans is actually very, very good, but the banding is crazy. At first I thought it was the scanner, but it didn't do it with any other film in a session of 20 scans.


Tim, if you check the MDC:

https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=%25Bergger+Pancro+400%25&Developer=%25Pyrocat%25&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C&TimeUnits=D


You will find that Panchro 400 / Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 is 17min at 24C !!!!! Not 20C...

So at 20C, time should be around 30min... for this reason development is provided at 24C, to not have a very long time.

David Aimone
26-Apr-2019, 05:33
Well this is disturbing, since I just purchased a box of 8x10 to try again after my problems in 5x7 in 2017. I assumed since I didn't hear of any other problems that it was a fluke or had been solved.

I don't think it has anything to do with the developer, since it happened to about 25% of my negatives from the box of 5x7 in 2017. Half were sent out to a lab; the other half developed by me at home.

Oh joy, I can't wait to see the banding on 8x10. I'll have to wait for another month or two for the 8x10 camera to arrive...


Reviving old thread...

I finally got around to scanning my Pancro test negatives today, one developed in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 at 20deg C 18mins (guess time which proved to be quite a bit too short, this film needs lots of time in the soup!) and another at 2:2:100 20degC for 11.5mins (a lot better density and contrast,) and on both have noticed the exact same fault as this. Faint but easily seen parallel lines running down short edge of 8x10 sheets. All four of them, all developed independently in trays.

Could this be a coating fault? Doesnt seem like x-ray damage as looks too consistent and straight, with more abrupt edges to the bands.

This film does claim to have a special base anti-hilation layer that gives a higher than usual (compared to competition) base density. Could it be a problem with this special layer, with coating problem emphasised by pyro stain?

Anyone else seen this on Pancro or any other film?

bob carnie
26-Apr-2019, 05:36
On a totally different tanget.. Does anyone here know where Bergger paper and film is manufactured..Do they do this themselves??

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 14:38
David: My box was purchased about 18 months ago, and since then I believe there has been another run with supposedly with improved coating. So maybe it has been solved? I'll post some crops to illustrate what I'm getting, but essentially seeing the same as you but maybe not as pronounced.

In terms of the paper, I believe that Harman makes if for them to their recipe / specs, but might be wrong. Might be Inoviscoat, Germany. Bergger use their own paper base.

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 14:59
An example: A test diptych image and crop from left image sky (with added contrast to emphasise banding.)

190569190570

docw
26-Apr-2019, 15:32
If this is any help, here are my development times for Panchro in D76 (1 : 1, my own home brew) in a Jobo at 50 RPM at 20C with a 2' pre-soak. I used Ralph Lambrecht's procedure and spreadsheet and got a normal development time of 10'30" and an EI of 125.

N+1 is 13' 45" with an adjusted EI of 160.
N-1 is 8' 15" with an adjusted EI of 100

I am into my second box of 4x5 with no problems and I am just about to start a box of 8x10.

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 16:09
Thanks, interesting... Bergger's own recommendations for 1:1 D76 at 20 degrees C. rated at 400 is a full 17 mins. Would love to see some of your results if you're able to post them or share via PM.


If this is any help, here are my development times for Panchro in D76 (1 : 1, my own home brew) in a Jobo at 50 RPM at 20C with a 2' pre-soak. I used Ralph Lambrecht's procedure and spreadsheet and got a normal development time of 10'30" and an EI of 125.

N+1 is 13' 45" with an adjusted EI of 160.
N-1 is 8' 15" with an adjusted EI of 100

I am into my second box of 4x5 with no problems and I am just about to start a box of 8x10.

Keith Fleming
26-Apr-2019, 17:54
Bob,

I also have been wondering who actually manufactures Panchro 400. When Bergger first distributed film under the Bergger brand at least 10 years ago, the film actually was made by Forte in Europe. Forte's film-coating line used equipment that was pre-war Kodak machinery. From that connection, Bergger advertised that it was selling the equivalent of Kodak Super XX film. This caught the attention of many of us--but then Forte went bankrupt and shut down. Bergger sort of went away too for a while. Since the introduction of the current Panchro 400, I have not heard anything about who is the current manufacturer for Bergger.

I should add here that the original Bergger films sold for a higher price than the same film under the Forte name. That has been my motivation for trying to discover who makes Panchro 400. But that information clearly is closely held.

Keith

Tim V
26-Apr-2019, 18:18
99.9% sure Pancro is a unique film coated by Inoviscoat, Germany.

Keith Fleming
26-Apr-2019, 20:22
Tim V.

Thank you!

Keith

Tim V
27-Apr-2019, 15:20
Another example. It's certainly not a processing fault, of that I'm certain. I also thought it might be a scanner fault, but these negatives were scanned in a larger run with a whole lot of other 8x10" sheets (HP5 with PMK and Pyrocat-HD) and nothing else has any hint of these faults. Only the four sheets of Pancro–all the Pancro I shot–has it.

Attached here is another example test, made only to see how the different films render. Top diptych is HP5+ in Pyrocat-HD, 1:1:100 @20 degrees C. for 14 mins. Bottom diptych is Pancro in Pyrocat-HD @20 degrees C. for 18 mins. It's underdeveloped unfortunately as I guessed the Pyrocat-HD time off the PMK times compared to HP5+ (Bergger later supplied correct times.) Regardless, it still displays the fault quite clearly.

Crops have much heightened contrast to emphasise the fault (HP5+ sheets are perfect, save for some of the usual surge marks from tray processing.) Pancro again has the banding

.190622190623190624

Tim V
27-Apr-2019, 19:37
Update: have checked the negatives under magnification on lightbox and it’s definitely on the film, so NOT a scanning fault.

Batch number of my box is: 1611030889/2/22 exp: 12.2021

John Layton
28-Apr-2019, 04:23
Just gotta say this...that we work way too hard for our images to put up with this!

Back in 2004, in the midst of having a great run with Fp4 souped in PMK - I decided to try Bergger 200, and highlights were so clipped that it turned me off to PMK entirely.

Well...I've been re-printing some of my old FP4/PMK negs recently - and I think I'll give PMK another try!

Apologies to Gordon H. for being so misplaced in dropping his wonderful formula when the actual culprit was in plain sight!

Tim V
28-Apr-2019, 13:04
You are of course right, John. Part of me wonders why I'm trying so hard to make this film work for me when HP5+ and FP4 are so rock solid. I guess it's just that I know those films so well now and feel it's a good time to experiment with something else to see what it might add to the toolbox. I love Bergger's paper, especially semi-gloss warmtone, so like to think buying their film too would help assure the company's survival. Regardless, if the film is inconsistent and not 100% rock solid, I'm out.

Bergger have replied to an email and asked for the batch number from the box, so I'll see what happens. Will be make or break for the continued experiment.

EDIT: They did reply and I’m happy with the outcome, see post later in the thread.


Just gotta say this...that we work way too hard for our images to put up with this!

Back in 2004, in the midst of having a great run with Fp4 souped in PMK - I decided to try Bergger 200, and highlights were so clipped that it turned me off to PMK entirely.

Well...I've been re-printing some of my old FP4/PMK negs recently - and I think I'll give PMK another try!

Apologies to Gordon H. for being so misplaced in dropping his wonderful formula when the actual culprit was in plain sight!

John Layton
28-Apr-2019, 14:49
I was hesitant with my post...knowing how difficult it can be for any film company these days to keep us supplied so we can keep doing what we love - and I do have respect for anyone who attempts to step up to the plate for us.

But at the end of the day...after I've shouldered a 40lb pack on my 64+ year old frame for hours on end to capture something that can be so fleeting - I simply need to know that my film is good - period...and that my coming up short in some way is entirely on me - and not the result of something suddenly coming out of the blue that I cannot predict nor control.

Tim V
28-Apr-2019, 14:51
Amen to that.

docw
28-Apr-2019, 18:19
Tim, here are two test shots I did with Panchro. I think that the Jobo and the dilution shortens the time considerably.

190662 190663

Tim V
28-Apr-2019, 21:25
Thanks Docw.

If you haven’t mentioned already, what times and temps etc did you use with the Jobo?
I do like the tones of this film! Thanks for sharing.

T

Tim, here are two test shots I did with Panchro. I think that the Jobo and the dilution shortens the time considerably.

190662 190663

Tim V
29-Apr-2019, 01:34
I have had a series of very good communications with Bergger and am very happy with the outcome. This is the response of a good company and going forward I hope to be a loyal buyer of their film as well as paper.

As I've said before, I couldn't do without their warmtone semi-gloss CB paper. Talking to others who have used Pancro and experimented to find their own methods of using it, they absolutely love it and the results speak for themselves.

Thanks to Bergger and hopfully I can post some successes and contribute good first hand experience with it and Pyrocat soon.

David Aimone
29-Apr-2019, 07:46
I'd love to hear about any useful information or resolution to the problem before I shoot my 25 8x10 sheets, if there is more you can share. I tried contacting someone from Bergger a while back when I had the trouble with 5x7 and had no response.

I am not a big fan of HP5. Maybe it's me, but everything I've shot with it in any format looks dull to me. It's probably me since so many other people love the stuff. I love their FP4, but I often need to shoot ISO 400 with indoor natural light. There's always Arista EDU, I've been able to tweet some nice tones out of it and Pyro at 1:2:100.


I have had a series of very good communications with Bergger and am very happy with the outcome. This is the response of a good company and going forward I hope to be a loyal buyer of their film as well as paper.

As I've said before, I couldn't do without their warmtone semi-gloss CB paper. Talking to others who have used Pancro and experimented to find their own methods of using it, they absolutely love it and the results speak for themselves.

Thanks to Bergger and hopfully I can post some successes and contribute good first hand experience with it and Pyrocat soon.

docw
29-Apr-2019, 10:16
Tim, I have not shot much all winter and as I look at my notes and data from last year, I might have made a slight error in my reporting on this in another thread. The towel photo in my previous post in this thread was developed for 10'30", I think :o

However, the cemetery stones photo was exposed according to my final test data which is as follows:

Normal development = 9'15" with and EI of 100.
N+1 = 12' with an EI of 100
N+2 = 17' with an EI of 125
N-1 = 7'45" with an EI of 80
N-2 = 6'15" with an EI of 80

The developer was a homebrew D76 1:1 and it was processed in a CPP2 at 20C/68F with a speed of 50 RPM.

I am going to start more extensive shooting with this film (in 4x5 and 8x10) very shortly. It has been a long cold winter!

Tim V
29-Apr-2019, 14:28
Thanks DocW.
T