Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site asgb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!grkermi!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!asgb!mike
From: mike@asgb.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: tech pan developer
Message-ID: <713@asgb.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 10:33:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: asgb.713
Posted: Wed Jun 12 10:33:21 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Jun-85 05:08:17 EDT
References: <704@asgb.UUCP> <7912@ucbvax.ARPA>
Organization: The Wombat's Lair
Lines: 29

> >> Was there a note here recently about using HC-110 to develop
> >> technical pan film?  ...
> 
> >I wouldn't be TOO hopeful here.  Tech pan is such a high contrast film
> >that you need developers specifically designed to produce low contrast
> >results.
> 
> I have had decent results with a dilution of HC-110 with tech pan. You
             ======
> can indeed get the low contrast characteristic from HC-110 if you spend
> some time reading the data sheets. Technidol is still the best, but
> HC-110 is also one of the recommended developers on the tech pan data
> sheet.

HC-110 is indeed one of the developers recommended on the tech pan
data sheet, however at the dillution/times listed, it still produces a
negative significantly more contrasty than technidol.  I remember a
PhotoGraphic article about developing tech pan with ( I think ) FG-7.
I'll try to dredge out that article.  Getting down to normal contrast
ranges with HC-110 probably requires some testing.

also...
Maybe I'm getting too picky about wording here, but I thought the idea
behind using tech pan was to get SUPERIOR results, not decent.

Mike Rosenlof				   ihnp4!sabre!\
					hplabs!sdcrdcf!-bmcg!asgb!mike
		    { ihnp4, ucbvax, allegra }!sdcsvax!/
Burroughs Advanced Systems Group 		     Boulder, Colorado