different formats 5x7 9x12 3.25 x 4.25

Stephen Batey

Well-Known Member
Registered User
I use 5x7 (I've bought several boxes of Adox from you), 13x18 (slightly preferred to 5x7) as well as 10x8. I've almost stopped using 5x4 in favour of medium and large format :)
 

Marley

Active Member
Registered User
I use 5x7, tried Adox CHS100 in 5x4 and didn't get on with it that well (went back to Fomapan 200), but always willing to give things a second chance. I do have a lot of half plate film holders ....
 
Last edited:

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
Might be interested in some Quarter plate film. I'm alright for other formats although I'd be interested n 12"x10" once I finishe restoring the plate holders.

My biggest gripe is Ilford don't cut Harman Direct Positive paper to traditional British sizes like Half plate, Whole Plate 12"x10" and 15"x12".

Ian
 

Nas

New Member
Registered User
Ian, have you asked Ilford if they'd consider doing a limited run of traditional British sizes in the Harman Direct Positive paper? I think it's a great idea especially as the holders are quite easy to come by.
 

thronobulax

Active Member
Registered User
I have a general question on Shanghai for you all (also sold in the US by Catlabs under their own label). I tried some of the rollfilm several years ago and just loved the stuff. The only other film that seemed much like this was/is Efke.

But the Shanghai quality control was just awful. It was full of dust and spots to the point of complete unsuitability.

Has this been fixed? Can one reliably use the film and expect pro levels of quality and repeatability?
 

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
Ian, have you asked Ilford if they'd consider doing a limited run of traditional British sizes in the Harman Direct Positive paper? I think it's a great idea especially as the holders are quite easy to come by.
I did ask Ilford on another Forum but they didn't reply. More importantly I asked them about the RC version as I'd been in discussion with an Ilford director for use in large scale multi site project.

Most people don't realise that Harman Direct Positive emulsion was actually the basic emulsion for Cibachrome/Ilfochrome without the dye couplers. Originally the emulsion was made in the old Tellko factory (who pioneered the process) later taken over by Ciba who also acquired Ilford. When Ilford here in the UK went into voluntrr receivership and latera management buy-out they became a separate compny to Ilford in Marly, Switzerland.

The first Harman Direct Positive paper used emulsion from Marly and was coated here at Mobberly there were RC and FB versions, however the second coating run of RC paper failed. Essentially the emulsion had been designed for coating on Mylar, it coated OK on FB papaper and they'd been lucky with teh first RC run. Emulsions have to be altered depending on the base, but the Direct Positive emulsion is far more complex than a normal B&W emulsion. It's likely that the volume of potential sales is too low to recoup the costs of R&D to make it feasible.

Ian
 

Nas

New Member
Registered User
Thanks, Ian. I'm just glad they are still making it after it disappeared for a while.
 

Nas

New Member
Registered User
I have a general question on Shanghai for you all (also sold in the US by Catlabs under their own label). I tried some of the rollfilm several years ago and just loved the stuff. The only other film that seemed much like this was/is Efke.

But the Shanghai quality control was just awful. It was full of dust and spots to the point of complete unsuitability.

Has this been fixed? Can one reliably use the film and expect pro levels of quality and repeatability?
Very good question. I'd also like to know before I order some of this new 220 film.
 

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
Thanks, Ian. I'm just glad they are still making it after it disappeared for a while.
It disappeared after Ilford in Switzerland went bust, Harman had licensed the rights to keepmusing the branda name from them. ThenHarman had to negotiate with the recievers to get therights to make the emulsion themselves,

Sounds complicated but more legal than the practicalities as the former Ilford staff in Switzerland were on very good terms with their former colleages in Mobberley, after all the'd worked together as one company for decades.

Ian
 

nikki

New Member
Registered User
I have a general question on Shanghai for you all (also sold in the US by Catlabs under their own label). I tried some of the rollfilm several years ago and just loved the stuff. The only other film that seemed much like this was/is Efke.

But the Shanghai quality control was just awful. It was full of dust and spots to the point of complete unsuitability.

Has this been fixed? Can one reliably use the film and expect pro levels of quality and repeatability?
absolutely yes! The Shanghai factory is no longer in state control and they have had assistance from another reputable company. The current emulsion is lovely and very consistent.
 

nikki

New Member
Registered User
Very good question. I'd also like to know before I order some of this new 220 film.
absolutely it has! the Shanghai factory is no longer in State control and they have had assistance from a reputable company, the current emulsion is lovely and we have not come across any quality control issues
 

thronobulax

Active Member
Registered User
absolutely yes! The Shanghai factory is no longer in state control and they have had assistance from another reputable company. The current emulsion is lovely and very consistent.
That's good to hear. I've just ordered a box of 5x4 to try it. I do wish it was easily found in 3x2 as well but no one (at least in US) is selling it in that format, though Shangai claim they do make it in that size.
 

Monsta

Member
Registered User
I seem to get a really weird kind of scum on my GP3 negs when developed with Pyrocat HD which does not appear when using RO9 for some reason. Anyone else get the same? It's the only film i can find in 3.25 x 4.25 so am a bit stuck with it.
 

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
There was a post somewhere else recently with Pyrocat and I think a different film and it's due to the Carbonate and Calcium salts in the water. It can also happen if you use plain Sodium Sulphite as a wash aid when printing.. It should be possible to remove the scum using an Acetic acid bath 2x normal stop bath strength.

Ian
 

Monsta

Member
Registered User
Could be my dodgy London water then. Thanks for the suggestion, will try it out.
 
Top