Bergger Pancro 400 in Pyrocat-HD?

[paulbarden]

PS Paul, I forgot to ask. Have you tried Pancro with Xtol? I'm wondering how you found it, and if for the combinations mentioned you developed per Bergger's recommendations for time etc.

My issue at the moment is that I'm about to transition from tray processing using PMK to Jobo processing in expert drums, so PMK is out and if I want to stay with pyro stain the Pyrocat-HD makes the most sense. I like the idea of making duel purpose negatives that I can use for both silver VC and later UV processes. Anyway, this has me thinking it might be time to experiment to find a new combination I like to supplement or, if it's really to my taste, replace HP5+. As I said above, I've seen examples posted from Pancro I really like and enjoy supporting the small manufacturers with business where I can, but the product has to be both reliable and high quality. Bergger's papers are great, so have been wondering about Pancro.

Hi Tim.
I have to check to be sure, but I am certain I have processed 120 rolls of Pancro 400 in Xtol and probably done some 8X10 sheets in Xtol as well. If I have only done it occasionally its because I switched from Rodinal early on and went straight to either PMK (in trays) or BER49 (A repackaging of Atomal 49) which I much prefer. I think Xtol would be a perfectly reasonable choice for Pancro 400, but because it seems Xtol restrains highlight development, it may not get you negatives that are good for UV processes. You might want to find something else if you want good negs for Alt UV printing.

If you want to try Pancro 400 for yourself, but don't want to dive straight in to a full box of sheets (now priced at about $125 per 25), then I will gladly send you a few sheets of 8X10 to try for yourself. I stocked up on 8x10 Pancro in 2017 so I have a few boxes of it, and I can certainly spare 4 or 5 sheets for you to try out. Just reimburse me the cost of mailing and we're good. PM me if you're interested.

[Tim V]

Thanks Paul, that is a very generous offer! Unfortunately I live in New Zealand so that makes things difficult. I think I might add a few rolls of 120 Pancro to a B&H order, process in PMK and see if I like it. D76 was awful I thought, but people seem to like it with PMK. I’m trying to keep myself in check thinking that I’m trying a new film for no good reason other than curiosity, but I guess that’s how one finds their own look and process.

Can anyone recommend a simple way to determine a dev time with Pyrocat, without resorting to densitometers etc? Was thinking about a clip test kind of thing with 120 film; same exposure repeated 10 times, cut roll into equal lengths and process separately?

[paulbarden]

Can anyone recommend a simple way to determine a dev time with Pyrocat, without resorting to densitometers etc? Was thinking about a clip test kind of thing with 120 film; same exposure repeated 10 times, cut roll into equal lengths and process separately?

That is exactly the way to approach the issue, yes. 12 shots exactly the same and cut the roll up into 3bor 4 pieces, process and adjust.

[Tim V]

Thanks.

To determine a good starting point for testing, if Bergger's recommended time for PMK 1:1:100 is 18min and Pyrocat has reportedly shorter development times, should I begin at a time 20% shorter than PMK, eg 14.5mins? Then do next test at 15.5min, followed by 16.5min then if needed 17.5/18min.

I'll have to do these tests with manual inversion and am conscious it will be different, am I correct in thinking that rotary is generally 10% shorter?

Lastly, what's the best way to assess the actual negative information? I'm guessing simply making wet prints (how they'll end up) is best, and aiming to get the scene to print at grade 2-3?

[David Schaller]

I have no experience with the Bergger film, but lots with Pyrocat. I would start with even less time, like 12 (or even 10) minutes, then 14, 16 and maybe 18. I think one minute differences are too close. You can fine tune it later with real pictures. My guess is with hand inversion you’ll end up in the 12-14 minute range, since that’s where I have found tri-x, hp5, and tmy to sit, with roll film hand inverted and sheets in trays (or hand inverted in Jobo). I would look at the Pyrocat times for those films, and expect the Bergger to be nearby. You could then either scan or contact print the strips.

[Jim Noel]

I think David is on the right track, but his time increases ae relatively minor. 10 minutes to 14 minutes is factor of 1.4, (sound familiar?) 14 -16 minutes is a factor of only about 1.15. I use a factor of 1.4 consistently. whether developing film or exposing film or paper. When testing a new film/developer combo I usually begin with 10,then 14, then 14 x 1.4 = 19.6 or 20 min (or seconds if you are talking about exposure) and so forth. if beginning with a shorter time, 5 for example, 5x1.4= 7, etc.It is easy to interpolate from this point.

[David Schaller]

That’s very helpful Jim. I will try that when making test prints!

[Tim V]

Thanks for the tips, much appreciated!

Bergger’s Recommended developing times with all developers are very long across the board. E.g. they recommend stock D76 at 20 degrees C at 9min, vs. Ilford’s recommendation for HP5 with stock ID11 at 7:30mins. Kodak recommends 6:45mins for Tri-X in stock D76. Interestingly Bergger recommends 6mins for Pancro in rapid fix, which is also longer than other films. I wonder if it’s a thicker, more silver rich emulation?

Anyway, I’ve received 3 rolls to test so will report back.

[m00dawg]

I like Pancro 400 when it works but actually I'll say I don't much care for it in XTOL. It feels too slow at its box speed, which is frustrating because I feel like CHS ii, TMX, and HP5 all give me properly dense negatives at box speed of similar subjects. I'm sure I'll end up with a different than box speed if I ran through tests, but I'd bet they are close - Pancro is not.

Pancro seems like it's MUCH slower than 400 if I based it off the thin negatives I get. Granted, I get good (if grainy) results from it. Feels like it has a lot of latitude but I generally like well developed negatives and Pancro 400 just seems thinner than other emulsions. In XTOL. I think perhaps trying BERSPEED might be something to try but then again I tend to prefer films that gives me good results in XTOL so I can have one developer. I use it replenished as well and it just simplifies things.

On the plus, their packaging is absolutely top notch. Which is a silly reason to like a film but, really, they pack their sheet film really well in sturdy, fancy, boxes.

It's not 400 but really digging the newly reintroduced ADOX CHS ii. And to be fair I like the results in Pancro 400 when it works. It's just a bit frustrating to deal with given it just feels soooo far off 400.

[Tim V]

Thanks for your reply. Do you rate it at EI200, or slower?

I could cope with 200 effective ISO but slower would be a killer. Like you, I’d rather try CHS100ii or stick to FP4+. The Adox looks great though, and I’m itching to try it and the Pancro but want a good starting point for developing with Pyrocat first.