Technical Pan

[BennoLF]

Hey y'all,

I recently got my hands on some expired 4x5 techpan, cold storage, only 50 sheets. From what I can tell this is a legendary film that needs lots of testing and work to get results worth shooting such a rare film.
I'm extremely new to the whole large format film thing. With only 50 exposures to work with, I'm wary about using it. Would it be worth it to just save it until I have a stabilized workflow and process etc? I'd rather sell this to someone who a) has already done testing so they can really use the full extent of this film b) has a consistent darkroom and a consistent workflow. I'd rather have like 100 sheets of other stuff I'm willing to use and have someone else who knows how to use techpan gets another shot at it.
2 questions:
a) How should I make sure this gets into good hands? If I sell it on ebay anyone with a paypal could get their hands on it(and possibly waste it).
b) what in the heck would be a reasonable price? I've seen people pay like $4 a sheet. Is this even close to sane?

Sorry, this is a lot. I just don't want this stuff to get wasted.

[Eric Woodbury]

Good questions. I use a fair amount of Tech Pan. Wonderful film for my use, but it is not for everybody.

In my experience, most people use it as a high resolution, normal contrast film. It can be this. It is extremely high resolution. As a quirk, it has good red sensitivity which can be used for or against you. It is hard to tame into normal contrast, but with Rodinal or POTA or other slow developers, it can be controlled. I use it for its high contrast; when I want to photograph a subjects innate contrast, not the contrast of the light, but the contrast of just the subject. This can require N+4 or more. Needless to say, at that level of contrast, it is nearly impossible to get the correct exposure. In these cases, I will expose carefully, say a little prayer, and hope for the best. Every photo is a throw of the dice.

It is interesting and fun. Good luck.

[Vaughn]

It is not a good beginner film -- that said, it has some great characteristics for special circumstances and uses in printing.

A rate of one sheet of tech pan for 2 sheets of 4x5 film sounds reasonable. From Freestyle, that would be about $160 plus tax/shipping...or twice that for TMax. And that would probably be a lowball offer.

I have a long-term project for which I use Tech Pan (along with copy film) that can take advantage of its characteristics (alt process where I want high contrast negatives) and do not mind the slow speed.

Tamed with the appropiate developers, it can make grainless enlargements...easily 16x20. But I suggest seeing what 'normal' films can do first.

If you offer it in the For Sale section, you will get some good responses.

PS -- edited to better reflect the rules.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I used it for a bit back in the 90's, developed in Technidol. If I had some now, I'd try it in POTA. What's the expiry date on it?

[BennoLF]

1987.

I like the idea of shooting it because I'm a high resolution guy and the red sensitivity does well with what I shoot. Side question: is it possible to replicate it with a really harsh red filter and a sharp film, or is there something else there that I don't understand?

[Vaughn]

For me, it is the contrast one can build up with it -- I contact print, so fine grain/extreme sharpness is not as critical for me as the contrast flexibility (which is why I can use 'normal' developers with Tech Pan).

[Alan9940]

I suppose related to assessing a value for selling is... Do you know how the film has been stored for 30+ years? I've only ever used it in 120 roll format and used Technidol many years ago, when it was available, and 510-Pyro most recently. I wouldn't recommend it for a beginning LF photographer.

[rdenney]

Hey y'all,

I recently got my hands on some expired 4x5 techpan, cold storage, only 50 sheets. From what I can tell this is a legendary film that needs lots of testing and work to get results worth shooting such a rare film.
I'm extremely new to the whole large format film thing. With only 50 exposures to work with, I'm wary about using it. Would it be worth it to just save it until I have a stabilized workflow and process etc? I'd rather sell this to someone who a) has already done testing so they can really use the full extent of this film b) has a consistent darkroom and a consistent workflow. I'd rather have like 100 sheets of other stuff I'm willing to use and have someone else who knows how to use techpan gets another shot at it.
2 questions:
a) How should I make sure this gets into good hands? If I sell it on ebay anyone with a paypal could get their hands on it(and possibly waste it).
b) what in the heck would be a reasonable price? I've seen people pay like $4 a sheet. Is this even close to sane?

Sorry, this is a lot. I just don't want this stuff to get wasted.

Your question (b) is one we avoid on the forum, by policy--please read the guidelines about asking for valuations. It's easy enough to figure out what it's worth, if anything. I'm leaving the thread open as long as you are receiving advice on how to use the film yourself.

Your question (a) is a lot easier. Your 30-day introductory period is over, so you should have access to the For Sale forum. List it there with whatever price you think, based on the research you did in (b).

But read the guidelines first--our for-sale forum is there to serve as a classifieds listing for members.

Rick "who hasn't used Tech Pan since, oh, about 1978" Denney

[jp]

Little sense to play with it until you get good with it and then run out of film. I'd suggest selling it for what the market can bear and buy some film you're apt to use... If you like super fine grain, perhaps tmax400, delta 100, tmax100, or fp4+ would be worth your while to learn. In reality, any of these listed films are fine enough grain it's not worth splitting hairs over to find the finest grain.

[Drew Wiley]

It's not a good beginner film. You need special developers for ordinary contrast work. The scale of the film in terms of the brightness range it will handle is less than most. It might, as you say, have a theoretical capacity for high resolution; but because it has poor edge acutance - which I don't want to explain here - but it doesn't really look very sharp in print. I recommend something like FP4 as a good versatile learner film, though some people stick with FP4 for good. I once used Tech Pan film for forensic photography (like detecting art fraud under IR lighting), or for restoration copies of very old faded photographic prints, stuff like that. I never cared for it as a "taking" film for general use. But everyone seems tempted to try at least once.

[Mark Sampson]

The basic issue is that TP is a high-contrast film. Taming that contrast, by using special low-contrast developers, is a difficult (and usually losing) proposition. The nice thing about LF is that film grain doesn't really matter, as the ordinary enlargement ratios are so small... usually 1x to 4x.
Since you're just starting, I'd recommend a medium-speed film (as others have mentioned). FP4+ is a fine film, with excellent resolution and lovely tonality, that is also easy to learn. Then a year from now, when you have some experience, give the TP a try (if you're not satisfied with your FP4+ results). That will save you a lot of frustration, I believe. Best of luck!

[mpirie]

If you end up keeping the 5x4 TP, then by the time your finished testing the sensitivity (remember it's 30+ years old) and finding the right developer for your tastes, your box of 50 sheets will be well depleted......and there is a VERY limited supply of material.

The advantage of sticking to something like FP4+ is that it's still available (and hopefully will be for a long time to come) and is much more flexible in terms of exposure and development.

Mike

[Arne Croell]

I’ll echo what others have said - TP is not the right film for general use, especially starting out. I’ve used it with the special developers to tame the contrast (Kodak Technidol LC, Tetenal Neofin Doku, both gone now) only in 35mm and a bit in 120, years ago, before I started with LF. As Drew mentions, its exposure latitude even with those type developers is small, and blocked highlights are hard to avoid with anything more contrasty than normal. In zone system parlance, anything beyond a zone 3-7 range is going to be flat in the highlights. It can work with low contrast scenes, such as this: https://www.arnecroell.com/p926133692/h4cae6f7#h4cae6f7 (that is in 35mm), but that is more the exception than the rule. It’s main attraction with those developers is the small grain, but we are talking LF here, so unless you want to enlarge to 40x50”, a film like Tmax 100 works perfectly fine.

It has its uses for VERY low contrast scenes as mentioned by Eric, something I learned at a John Sexton workshop years ago, using a regular developer such as HC-110 in a high dilution to expand it by several zones. An example are petroglyphs in the Southwest, which often have only 1-2 stops of contrast range. Exposure has to be just right for those applications. So I’d either try to sell it, or put it back into the freezer for the time you might need its special properties. Since it is quite a low speed film, age fog and loss of sensitivity shouldn’t be too pronounced when stored cold.

[Jim Jones]

My favorite use for Tech Pan is as a solarized negative. An exposure index of about 25 and a brief development in Solarol developer with a reversal flash worked well after much experimenting. A pre-wash is absolutely necessary when doing this. In this photo the background was completely black.

[Eric Woodbury]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_48fdG46oyK8/RlzIn8CwXsI/AAAAAAAAAEM/7_ej8_I_SVU/s1600-h/Agave.jpg

I don't know how these links work. Hope this shows up.

This image was made on Techpan. Probably developed in D23 divided. Subject is a plant that is green with a delicate edge that is brighter as the light filters through, creating the white lines. Development I'd guess, by conventional terms, might be N+4 or 5 or ... I think I made only one exposure and got lucky.

As mentioned, grain is very fine or nonexistent. Its feeling of sharpness seems to more related to its edges. TP develops a fine edge.

Mentioned several times as not a beginner's film. True enough, but we are all beginners once. You have plenty to have a good time. Not enough to make a career or even a party, but enough to enjoy. Shooting it as high contrast is a crap shoot no matter what. True with any film that can do N+4 and beyond. I have a lot of this film and I've shot it for 35 years -- it's a guess every time. Only film I've found that might be close to TP available today, except for spectral sensitivity, is Ilford Ortho. Ilford FP4+ will do a nice N+4 in a more controlled sense (that is nice gradation) with one of Wimberley's pyro formulas.



As for selling it; most don't want to pay the price.

[Arne Croell]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_48fdG46oyK8/RlzIn8CwXsI/AAAAAAAAAEM/7_ej8_I_SVU/s1600-h/Agave.jpg

I don't know how these links work. Hope this shows up.

This image was made on Techpan. Probably developed in D23 divided. Subject is a plant that is green with a delicate edge that is brighter as the light filters through, creating the white lines. Development I'd guess, by conventional terms, might be N+4 or 5 or ... I think I made only one exposure and got lucky.

As mentioned, grain is very fine or nonexistent. Its feeling of sharpness seems to more related to its edges. TP develops a fine edge.

Mentioned several times as not a beginner's film. True enough, but we are all beginners once. You have plenty to have a good time. Not enough to make a career or even a party, but enough to enjoy. Shooting it as high contrast is a crap shoot no matter what. True with any film that can do N+4 and beyond. I have a lot of this film and I've shot it for 35 years -- it's a guess every time. Only film I've found that might be close to TP available today, except for spectral sensitivity, is Ilford Ortho. Ilford FP4+ will do a nice N+4 in a more controlled sense (that is nice gradation) with one of Wimberley's pyro formulas.



As for selling it; most don't want to pay the price.
Nice image, Eric! As for N+4 or similar, you might want to have a look at the Rollei RPX 25 (it does come in 4x5”). I haven’t tried it for that, but when I tested the 120 version for normal photography when it came out, I found it exceptionally contrasty and blocking highlights, similar to TP in the special developers. I have a feeling it is of similar origin, tamed somewhat in this case by the emulsion formulation and not the developer. It might just get you to N+4 or similar with a concentrated developer.

[Eric Woodbury]

Arne, your website is absolutely splendid.

I purchased Rollei film, but never used. Decided that the last thing I needed was yet another film to learn. I'm sticking with HP5, FP4, with a little Ortho and TP thrown in for tricks. N+4 is easy with FP4 developed in that "nuclear pyro" formula from Wimberley.

Yes, the highlights can block, harder than any film I've ever used. Absolutely bullet proof highlights in some cases.

Last time I used Tech Pan was the spring. I was photographing at a friend's house, in total shade, at sun down. Point is the meter read no zone differential. I used TP. 20 sec exposure. Resulting image had plenty of contrast.

[Arne Croell]

Arne, your website is absolutely splendid.

I purchased Rollei film, but never used. Decided that the last thing I needed was yet another film to learn. I'm sticking with HP5, FP4, with a little Ortho and TP thrown in for tricks. N+4 is easy with FP4 developed in that "nuclear pyro" formula from Wimberley.

Yes, the highlights can block, harder than any film I've ever used. Absolutely bullet proof highlights in some cases.

Last time I used Tech Pan was the spring. I was photographing at a friend's house, in total shade, at sun down. Point is the meter read no zone differential. I used TP. 20 sec exposure. Resulting image had plenty of contrast.
Thank you, Eric. Btw, Rollei RPX 25 is made by Harman/Ilford. When I checked out the roll film version I was hoping for a successor to Agfa APX25, but no such luck😞.