Rollei ATP film

Hi all, I've seen that it is available the Rollei ATP film, whose
"subtitle" is "Technical Pan". It's a long time I'm looking for a
valid substitute of magic Kodal TP film, a film that could be treated
also with non-standard baths such as POTA or Delagi. There are few
data about this film, it is a superpanchromatic film, can anybody tell
more? I really want test it, starting with very diluited Rodinal
(1+100 and more). I'll let you know about results.
Bye
Z.

On 3/9/2008 12:26 AM piterengel spake thus:

Hi all, I've seen that it is available the Rollei ATP film, whose
"subtitle" is "Technical Pan". It's a long time I'm looking for a
valid substitute of magic Kodal TP film, a film that could be treated
also with non-standard baths such as POTA or Delagi. There are few
data about this film, it is a superpanchromatic film, can anybody tell
more? I really want test it, starting with very diluited Rodinal
(1+100 and more). I'll let you know about results.

Sorry I can't give you any answers, but just one question: why would you
want to ruin the potential results of a fine-grain film by developing it
in Rodinal?

On Mar 9, 9:41 am, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 3/9/2008 12:26 AM piterengel spake thus:

Hi all, I've seen that it is available the Rollei ATP film, whose
"subtitle" is "Technical Pan". It's a long time I'm looking for a
valid substitute of magic Kodal TP film, a film that could be treated
also with non-standard baths such as POTA or Delagi. There are few
data about this film, it is a superpanchromatic film, can anybody tell
more? I really want test it, starting with very diluited Rodinal
(1+100 and more). I'll let you know about results.

Sorry I can't give you any answers, but just one question: why would you
want to ruin the potential results of a fine-grain film by developing it
in Rodinal?

I'ìve developed TP in Rodinal 1+300 using a semi-static procedure,
obtaining a continuous tone negative and virtually no grain. I've
posted this method on digitaltruth.com too. So it is not completely
true that using Rodinal you ruin the fine grain characteristic of the
film. Then, Rodinal is available easely, it non expensive, and
generally I never use the reccomended bath for a film: for example
never used Technidol for TP (it was really very expensive!).
Bye
Z.

"piterengel" wrote
"David Nebenzahl" wrote
why would you want to ruin the potential results of
a fine-grain film by developing it in Rodinal?

My thoughts exactly.

I've developed TP in Rodinal 1+300 using a semi-static procedure,
obtaining a continuous tone negative and virtually no grain.

Shoot two identical rolls of TP. Develop one in Technidol, the
other in Rodinal. Make 11x14 prints. Compare.

I kept hearing about how dilute Rodinal, Rodinal with sulfite,
dilution-x of HC-110 give wonderful 'continuous-tone, fine grain'
negatives. Being as cheap an stingy as the next man, I tried them -
having used TP and Technidol since '83. The results _were_
negatives, and they _were_ continuous tone, and the
grain _wasn't_ monstrous - but the results were truly awful.

TP in Technidol produces prints with the same low, smooth and
creamy tones of 2 1/4 - 4x5. Nothing in the print makes you
think 'contrast'.

TP in Technidol looks a bit like TMax-100 in Microdol. However TP
and TMax prints, when viewed side by side, are very different and there
is no doubt which is which.

I have never used Technidol for TP

It is possible that's why Rodinal looks good.

If cost is an issue try POTA, it has to be the cheapest
developer in creation.

Better yet, have your girlfriend/wife buy you some Technidol for
your birthday. It is the ideal gift: You need it, you want it (you
will), and you won't buy it for yourself.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

On Mar 9, 5:46 pm, "Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:
"piterengel" wrote
"David Nebenzahl" wrote

why would you want to ruin the potential results of
a fine-grain film by developing it in Rodinal?

My thoughts exactly.

I've developed TP in Rodinal 1+300 using a semi-static procedure,
obtaining a continuous tone negative and virtually no grain.

Shoot two identical rolls of TP. Develop one in Technidol, the
other in Rodinal. Make 11x14 prints. Compare.

I kept hearing about how dilute Rodinal, Rodinal with sulfite,
dilution-x of HC-110 give wonderful 'continuous-tone, fine grain'
negatives. Being as cheap an stingy as the next man, I tried them -
having used TP and Technidol since '83. The results _were_
negatives, and they _were_ continuous tone, and the
grain _wasn't_ monstrous - but the results were truly awful.

TP in Technidol produces prints with the same low, smooth and
creamy tones of 2 1/4 - 4x5. Nothing in the print makes you
think 'contrast'.

TP in Technidol looks a bit like TMax-100 in Microdol. However TP
and TMax prints, when viewed side by side, are very different and there
is no doubt which is which.

I have never used Technidol for TP

It is possible that's why Rodinal looks good.

If cost is an issue try POTA, it has to be the cheapest
developer in creation.

Better yet, have your girlfriend/wife buy you some Technidol for
your birthday. It is the ideal gift: You need it, you want it (you
will), and you won't buy it for yourself.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Metershttp://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

I hope silly answers are end now... So can we turn back on Rollei ATP
questions please? Thanks.

"piterengel" wrote in message
...
Hi all, I've seen that it is available the Rollei ATP
film, whose
"subtitle" is "Technical Pan". It's a long time I'm
looking for a
valid substitute of magic Kodal TP film, a film that could
be treated
also with non-standard baths such as POTA or Delagi. There
are few
data about this film, it is a superpanchromatic film, can
anybody tell
more? I really want test it, starting with very diluited
Rodinal
(1+100 and more). I'll let you know about results.
Bye
Z.

I have no direct experience with this film but you can
find a data sheet at:
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/image...007_1.1_gb.pdf
Rather badly translated from German.
Freestyle carries this and the recommended Rollei Spur
developer. The MSDS is slightly odd because it lists what
appears to be two forms of Phenidone.
I've used quite a bit of Technical Pan over the years
mostly developed in Technidol. The results are extremely
fine grain but the combination is fussy. I found that in
order to get reasonable conrast I had to cut back
development somewhat from the recommended amount and expose
at around EI-12.
For 35mm I now use Kodak T-Max 100 in full strength
Microdol-X or Ilford Perceptol. I shoot at about EI-50 and
have no problems with high contrast highlights. The grain is
not quite as fine as Tech-Pan but very close and the
negatives begin to have the same smoothness of larger
negatives which was one of the characteristics of Technical
Pan. This should also work for other ISO-100 tabular grain
films such as Ilford Delta and Fuji Acros. Microdol-X and
Ilford Perceptol appear to be indentical. These developers
must be used at full strength to get the extra-fine-grain
effect. When diluted they become acutance developers but
with the same grain (and speed) as D-76.
Rodinal is not a fine grain developer although grain
is mostly a function of the emulsion rather than the
developer. At 1:100 it appears to suffer enough local
exhaustion to produce some "compensating" effects on many
films. This is essentially the flattening of the highlight
curve. This is not the same as overall low contrast because
the shape of the H&D curve is changed.
The same effects also generate edge effects which lead
to somewhat exagerated acutance. These may be desirable in
some cases but lead to somewhat strange looking images.
The Rollei film is evidently made by Maco, who have
made some successful films in the past. I doubt very much if
their emulsion making technology is up to Kodak's but it
appears to be the only game in town so is certainly worth
trying.
A Google search will find a lot of discussion of the
film by those who have tried it.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Hi,

A question about a statement below: "Develop one in Technidol.....".

That implies that Technidol is still available??? Is it??? I'd like to
get some. I was informed somewhere along the line that Technidol was no
longer available, hadn't looked because I didn't need it but now that
I'm shooting with a Minox B, Technidol sounds good.

Cheers,
Bogdan





Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

"piterengel" wrote
"David Nebenzahl" wrote

why would you want to ruin the potential results of
a fine-grain film by developing it in Rodinal?


My thoughts exactly.


I've developed TP in Rodinal 1+300 using a semi-static procedure,
obtaining a continuous tone negative and virtually no grain.


Shoot two identical rolls of TP. Develop one in Technidol, the
other in Rodinal. Make 11x14 prints. Compare.

I kept hearing about how dilute Rodinal, Rodinal with sulfite,
dilution-x of HC-110 give wonderful 'continuous-tone, fine grain'
negatives. Being as cheap an stingy as the next man, I tried them -
having used TP and Technidol since '83. The results _were_
negatives, and they _were_ continuous tone, and the
grain _wasn't_ monstrous - but the results were truly awful.

TP in Technidol produces prints with the same low, smooth and
creamy tones of 2 1/4 - 4x5. Nothing in the print makes you
think 'contrast'.

TP in Technidol looks a bit like TMax-100 in Microdol. However TP
and TMax prints, when viewed side by side, are very different and there
is no doubt which is which.


I have never used Technidol for TP


It is possible that's why Rodinal looks good.

If cost is an issue try POTA, it has to be the cheapest
developer in creation.

Better yet, have your girlfriend/wife buy you some Technidol for
your birthday. It is the ideal gift: You need it, you want it (you
will), and you won't buy it for yourself.


--
__________________________________________________ ______________
Bogdan Karasek
Montr‚al, Qu‚bec
Canada www.bogdanphoto.com

"I bear witness"
__________________________________________________ ______________

In article , Bogdan Karasek
says...
Hi,

A question about a statement below: "Develop one in Technidol.....".

That implies that Technidol is still available??? Is it???

Calumet has stock, apparently, and there are a couple of listings on
eBay.

On Mar 10, 5:12 am, Rob Morley wrote:
In article , Bogdan Karasek
says...

Hi,

A question about a statement below: "Develop one in Technidol.....".

That implies that Technidol is still available??? Is it???

Calumet has stock, apparently, and there are a couple of listings on
eBay.

I don't remeber who told, but it seems POTA is "equivalent" of
Technidol. POTA is:

sodium sulphite anidrous 30 g
phenidone 1.5 g
water to make 1 liter

It is an extremely low contrast developer. I've often used it with TP,
exposed at 25 ISO and developed for 11.5 min, with 3 turns of the tank
each minute. Bumping the bottom of the tank firmly to avoid the
formation of bubbles on film surface.
I was satisfied by this developer, unfortunately TP is no more
available..

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 22:42:40 -0700 (PDT), piterengel
wrote:

I don't remeber who told, but it seems POTA is "equivalent" of
Technidol. POTA is:

sodium sulphite anidrous 30 g
phenidone 1.5 g
water to make 1 liter

Actually that was Technidol LC. The liquid concentrate actually had
hydroquinone in it. Surprised the heck out of me.

JD