Neutrino
Hi everyone,
I’m currently shooting my first roll of Superpan 200 in 35mm format. I’d like to use ADOX ADX as the developer. Unfortunately, I can’t find any development times for this combination anywhere – neither in the data sheets, nor on DigitalTruth, nor anywhere else. There’s also nothing to be found on Infared or Retro 400s, which I could have used as a reference. I’m afraid I don’t really have the time or the experience to test the film thoroughly. So far, I’ve always just stuck to the manufacturers’ development instructions, with perhaps a few minor deviations.
That’s why I’m asking around to see if anyone has any experience with this combination and knows of suitable times at 20 degrees. The film was exposed at 200.
michael-kielgmxnet
I’d start by using the standard development time for Agfa APX 100. In other developers, the two films have quite similar development times. Even if it doesn’t work out 100% perfectly, you should still end up with something usable.
Neutrino
Thanks for that useful tip! I think I'll give it a go!
ThomasPauly
In my experience with other developers, Rollei Superpan 200 has always required longer development times than APX.
One developer for which both films are listed in the instructions is Rollei RHS-DC (also marketed as D74 One Shot). For this, the following times are specified at the rated sensitivity and a dilution of 1+7:
- Rollei Retro 100 ( = APX): 5:30
- Rollei Superpan 200: 6:30
This is consistent with the experiences mentioned above. I would estimate the starting value for trials with ADX using the formula (APX time) + 20%.
Regards
Tepe
Neutrino
Thanks to you too for your tip. I’ll give it a go with slightly longer APX times. I’m curious to see how it goes...
Neutrino
For those of you interested in how the Superpan 200 turned out in the ADX:
€
I’ve now developed the film for about 6 minutes, agitating it every 30 seconds at a temperature of around 21 degrees.
€
The film has certainly turned out well. So, thank you all again for your tips. As far as I can tell, it’s slightly underdeveloped and also slightly affected by underexposure. Does this combination perhaps mean it doesn’t quite reach ISO 200? The shadows are unfortunately a bit washed out as a result, but otherwise it actually looks quite good. I reckon APX 100 – time plus 20–25% is about right. I think if I’d conducted the development for 6:45, it would have turned out better. I actually think the sharpness is really good and the grain is still reasonably subtle, but I have to admit I don’t have anything to compare it with, as this was my first Superpan 200.
piu58
SP 200 has (as tested in several developers) a true ISO 100, nothing more.
