Kentmere Pan 400 vs Ilford HP5 Plus - Stand developed

[@nathanpiperphoto]

I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised by the Pan 400 here. On many of these shots the Pan 400 came out looking better than the duller HP5, with a great crisp, sharp, and punchy high contrast look.

[@ConanTroutman0]

100% agreed on the concert photography bit. Lighting conditions can vary but more often than not you'll have a subject with decent lighting and everything else ends up pretty thin on the neg. I've shot almost entirely HP5 @3200/6400 for the past year and it really is impressive just how well it fares.

[@py_film]

Thanks for testing!

[@danienelphoto]

Great information, ta!

[@josephasghar]

Great video. Very thorough.

[@IkontaRacconta]

Very well done video and great comparison of a scant appreciated film like kentmere 400. It performs well but I didn't like it very much in general and in particular for its grain. (but I don't even like the HP5 that much even if it is a film icon. I prefer other Ilfords)

[@Shaka1277]

I do agree and I would prefer something like Delta 3200 in DD-X or Microphen personally. I'm just glad to see how similar their performance is for a common use case.

[@michaelhaarstad2130]

Thanks for including your dev process! How crucial is temp control if the chems are roughly room air temp?

[@Shaka1277]

B&W is shockingly tolerant of different temperatures - I know people who develop in the fridge for very specific methods. The catch is that you do need to adjust the time a bit to match the temp so it's not *vital* but definitely best practise even if you're within a couple of degrees.

[@erichstocker8358]

Can't say based on what I saw on youtube that I saw that dropoff that you mentioned. However, the youtube compression really obfuscates any differences. I am surprised that your stand development of Kentmere did so while. I don't have that luck with Kentmere.

[@lilkngstr]

I agree for both the 100 and 400 speed films. I also prefer ilford when pulling. The bluer, i.e. not as clear, base is what you get with the pan line. Hang up a roll of acros next to them and you'll see some blue in the ilford.

[@mikhaillinberg9568]

Очень интересное сравнение, особенно интересно как по разному потолок и объем плафона передали эти пленки.

[@depressedfox6218]

What does...antahalation? Sorry. New to this

[@Shaka1277]

Don't apologise! You know how on a foggy night, street lights have a sort of "glow" or "bloom" around them? Film, especially black and white film, can do that with any bright light regardless of the weather, and that's called halation. Basically, the light is so bright that it "spills" from the bright part of the negative into other parts, causing a bleeding glow that's most visible at high contrast edges. An antihalation layer is part of the film and prevents that from happening by stopping the light from "spilling". The AH layer may be removed with just water during a prewash or during development (Rollei, Foma films), but some have to be removed by acidic stop bath and/or fixer (Ilford, any tabular grain film). In the Ilford case it's purple, and you often need to remove the last little bit of it with a hypo clear wash or just a ton of water washing. In this case, my standard washing method didn't fully remove the AH layer from one of the films. A little residual AH layer isn't a big deal for scanning but it can make printing a little more difficult. I know my reply is long, but I hope it was helpful!

[@depressedfox6218]

@@Shaka1277 definitely helpful! I really appreciate the in depth explanation. i have to watch the video again to have a visual connection to your reply. thank you.

[@julianl.109]

I should be buying more kentmere…