TechPan worth it in something other than Technidol

I've been delighted with my experiments with TechPan (35 mm) in Technidol -
the sharpness and lack of grain are amazing - and am wondering if I'd be as
pleased using Diafine or Rodinal. (I find these two to be easier to handle,
as well as cheaper.) How much of the TechPan advantage over something Tmax
100 remains if you move to a developer other than Technidol?

"FDN" wrote in message
...
I've been delighted with my experiments with TechPan (35
mm) in Technidol -
the sharpness and lack of grain are amazing - and am
wondering if I'd be as
pleased using Diafine or Rodinal. (I find these two to be
easier to handle,
as well as cheaper.) How much of the TechPan advantage
over something Tmax
100 remains if you move to a developer other than
Technidol?

I've used only Technidol on it. Technidol is similar to
POTA, a developer made from sulfite and phenidone. Tech Pan
requires a very low contast developer for pictorial
purposes. Diafine and Rodinal are not extra low contrast
developers although Rodinal can be diluted to the point
where it will yield low contrast.
The special agitation method recommended by Kodak is
mainly due to the very thin emulsion of Technical Pan. It
can't store much developer so the developer in it tends to
become exhausted quickly. The cocktail shaker agitation
insures getting the developer reaction products away from
the surface and fresh developer to the surface. Technidol
also appears to have a wetting agent in it. Kodak had a lot
of trouble from uneven development when Technical Pan was
first put on the market, the formulation of Technidol was
developed to reduce those problems.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Try using Tetenal Neofin Doku if you can get hold of it where you live.

I expose at ISO 80, and develop for 18,5 min, 22deg C, agitation 5 s every
30 seconds. I use the same method for 135 and 120 format films.

Gives negatives with good contrast and fine grain.

Knut O.
Norway - home of giants

Richard Knoppow skrev i
. pas.earthlink.net...

"FDN" wrote in message
...
I've been delighted with my experiments with TechPan (35
mm) in Technidol -
the sharpness and lack of grain are amazing - and am
wondering if I'd be as
pleased using Diafine or Rodinal. (I find these two to be
easier to handle,
as well as cheaper.) How much of the TechPan advantage
over something Tmax
100 remains if you move to a developer other than
Technidol?

I've used only Technidol on it. Technidol is similar to
POTA, a developer made from sulfite and phenidone. Tech Pan
requires a very low contast developer for pictorial
purposes. Diafine and Rodinal are not extra low contrast
developers although Rodinal can be diluted to the point
where it will yield low contrast.
The special agitation method recommended by Kodak is
mainly due to the very thin emulsion of Technical Pan. It
can't store much developer so the developer in it tends to
become exhausted quickly. The cocktail shaker agitation
insures getting the developer reaction products away from
the surface and fresh developer to the surface. Technidol
also appears to have a wetting agent in it. Kodak had a lot
of trouble from uneven development when Technical Pan was
first put on the market, the formulation of Technidol was
developed to reduce those problems.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA