Adox CHS 100 II sheet film

The posting seems to indicate that Adox are now coating for themselves at the old Tellko/Ilford factory in Marly, Switzerland. This would be the first product off the line.

I've still an unopened box of Afox CHS100, the earlier re-badged EFKE version. It would be interesting to try the new version . . . . . . which will be quite different in many respects.

Ian
 
Hello Ian, Have you been able to compare Adox CHS 100 and CHS 100 II with Efke PL 100? At least visually what do you think about the negatives? Do they exhibit the same density qualities when pushed to the limits of SBRs (assuming you contact print on silver chloride papers)? I have always loved using Efke PL 100 (in 8x10 in) despite its purported fragility (although quite frankly I have never had a problem with any issues of fragility). With Efke PL 100 I have been able to achieve an SBR as low as 5 (N+2) and as high as 15 (N-8). Would be great to know if CHS 100 II has that potential too. Cheers, Francesco.
 
Francesco, Adox CHS 100 II is an entirely different film to EFKE PL100, the first is a modern 100 ISO emulsion the second an early 1950's 200 ISO - Daylight, 100 ISO - Tungsten emulsion. Like any modern emulsion CHS 100 II will cope well with N+2 development, I've never seen an instance where you'd need anything remotely close to N-8 development.

When I first used EFKE films in the early 1970s they were very poorly hardened, extremely fragile, I either used a hardening stop bath, or added hardener to the developer to mitigate the issues. At some point in the 1980's EFKE improved the hardening, while not up to Ilford or Kodak standard I’ve not had issues.

I've always used EFKE PL 25 not PL100, and have two 50 sheet boxes of 10x8 left, so can't comment on PL 100, while I have some I've not used it yet.

Ian
 
Thanks Ian. Last time I used Efke PL100 was around 18 years ago. The image was an interior of a church which had no artificial lighting (it was way after closing time). The only light was the sunny day coming through a few of stained glass windows. In order to not "blow out" the windows (so that you can see quite clearly the stained glass outlines on the print) and keep detail in every dark nook and cranny inside (I lost my notes but if I remember correctly the high EV was around 13 and the low EV was around 3 - SBR = 15, N-8) I think I had to expose for over an hour (could have been 90 minutes, lens was stopped down to 64 I think) and develop (semi-stand, Pyrocat HD) for 10 minutes (maybe slightly less). This is why I miss Efke PL100. I would not dare use any other film for this shot (not even TMAX 400, which is my second favourite film). I was kind of hoping that CHS 100 II = Efke PL100. But from the sound of things, it may not be. The only solution I guess is to do some trial and error tests.
 
I have semistand processed both Efke PL100M and Adox CHS 100 II in dilute Pyrocat-HD within the last year. I can confirm they are not the same film. They are both very nice in their own way, but I do so wish I had stocked the Efke much more deeply prior to its commercial demise.

For my purposes, once the Efke is all gone, I'm likely to move to either Fomapan 200 (which has problems in rollfilm, but none observed in sheetfilm) or FP4+.
 
First, a confession: What I am about to say applies to some Adox CHS 100 II but in 3x2 format. Forgive me my sins, but I suspect this will generalize to 5x4 as well ...

My prior forays into CHS 100 II were under complex lighting situations where is was kind of hard to compare it to the Efke. Today I shot in much more "normal" light and semistand processed the film in Pyrocat-HD 1.5:1:200. I was testing a new (to me) Schneider Tele-Arton 180mm f/5.5 lens and pointing it at short distance to fallen tree bark and branches. The SBR was in the neighborhood of 7 stops or so.

The negs are drying as I write this, but upon visual inspection, they "seem" a lot like the old Efke PL100M sheet film. I realize that these are not the same film, but the apparent acuity and edge sharpness is visually reminiscent of the older Efke film (which I loved). We'll see when I print/scan, but this looks to be a worthy successor to the old film.

I have a bad old scanner and I've not quite figured out the Deep Magick required to have it properly respond the the Pyro stain, so I likely will not post anything further with this until I've made prints which can be scanned. (Direction on how to correct for the stain is also welcome.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top