I'd say your correct Don. I did load the film into the camera in subdued light, and
developed
it,as i mentioned, Wednesday. From looking at the neg's and the one print i did,it
looks
fine,
although i did scratch one or two frames a bit. Arghhh.
Daughter is out tonight,so i'll try and scan 1-2 for photo.net
> I used quite a lot of Technical Pan some years back
and
I loaded it in
> normal room light, sometimes even outdoors with my back to the sun. It
> was never fogged. You might expect very fast B&W to fog in bright light
> - a little perhaps - but surely not such a slow emulsion? It still doesn't
> make sense. I can understand Kodak saying that the film should be loaded
> into the tank (reel) in complete darkness but not into a camera while still
> in its cassette.
>
> More:
>
> I've just looked at the spec sheet you read - the .pdf file on Kodak
> Technical
> Pan.
>
> Indeed, they do say 'load camera in complete darkness do not use a
> safelight'.
> Or words to that effect. Later on they say that a safelight may be used
> after
> development is half way done. However, I think what they meant to write is
> load and your film holders, or cassettes from bulk 150 foot rolls too one
> supposes, in complete darkness. Suggesting that a 35mm cassette be put into
> a camera in 'complete darkness' is nonsense.
>
> Don
>
> _______________
> Dr E D F Williams
> http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
> Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
> Updated: March 30, 2002
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Technical Pan OT
>
>
> > >
> > Are you under the impression that the film, in
> > > its cassette, might have been fogged by subdued light in the bathroom?
> >
> > I was,but i developed in class last night with some technidol he had.One
> pack to 8 oz of
> > water. I rated it at 50(apparently it can be rated from 6 to 200) which
> agording to the
> > Kodak site is ok.I
> > developed for 5 min. and
> > all turned out well.Did a test print.Boy,impressive.Not much grain and
> lots of detail.
> >
> >
> > > You write 'The info on Kodak's website suggests to load and unload in
> > > complete darkness.' This doesn't make any sense either.
> >
> > Yhe web info on the Kodak site said it needs to be loaded unloaded un
> complete
> > darkness,which i did not do,but it seems to have had no effect loading
> (quickly)in subdued
> > light.
> >
> > Thanks all for the tips.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > > Don
> > >
> > > _______________
> > > Dr E D F Williams
> > > http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
> > > Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
> > > Updated: March 30, 2002
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:08 PM
> > > Subject: Technical Pan OT
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi all.
> > > > My darkroom instructor suggested i try a roll of TP.A lot of my B&W
> stuff
> > > is rural,old
> > > > farms etc and he
> > > > suggested it would be a good film to try as it can be shot at a low
> speed
> > > and obtain good
> > > > clear prints.
> > > > I shot one about 2.5 weeks ago,but like any good male,i read the
> > > instructions AFTER i
> > > > loaded it.The info
> > > > on Kodaks website suggests to load and unload in complete darkness.I
> > > unfortunalte loaded
> > > > it in
> > > > subdued light in my bathroom.
> > > > Am i s***ed here or will this little amount of light not effect much.I
> > > wondered about it
> > > > as the package is
> > > > translucent,not solid like the HIE films.
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts or comments before i possible waste some developing time.
> > > > BTW it's rated it at 50 with just a standard uv filter for the test.
> > > >
> > > > Dave(2 classes to go,boo hoo)Brooks
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
