I have seen the light! (And I need it at ISO25) [Archive]

matti

03-19-2006, 13:36

This is wonderful. I developed my first roll of Efke 25 tonight and I was impressed as soon as I cracked open the film spiral. I could see a meter away that this was something else. The tri-x and ilford pictures that I have been taking looks gritty and dull compared to this.

It even works straight out of the scanner, without any Photoshop curves (ok, I know of course the scanner puts some curves on it).

I developed it for 17 mins in 1:100 Calbe R09 (a Rodinal-like).

Can I expect the same sort of tones from the other Efke films? I can not use a 25-film that often here in Sweden...

And please, is it just that I have failed all my exposures until now (not that unlikely, as I'm such a neophyte), or is this film really the best? I mean, this is what B&W should look like, isn't it? I mean the tones and light, the pictures of my patient model on the test roll are not that revolutionary.

Check out the test shots and tell me that this can be done with tri-x (as I have 30 rolls in the fridge ;) ). Maybe all pictures look better when spring is getting closer?

/matti

Oh, and one more thing about efke. I put a film piece in the fixer to check that it was fresh. And it cleared during the five seconds I agitated the film box! Anyone else saw this? (I used 8 mins just to be sure thought...)

Socke

03-19-2006, 13:54

Looks realy good, I was undecided if I try some to redo some shots my father has taken here in the late 40s early 50s on Addox and Peruz 15 and 18 Din B/W. Your pictures remind me how those pictures look after I scanned them.

egpj

03-19-2006, 14:40

Your efke post is really interesting. I have been thinking about straying from Ilford to try some of it. Sort of scary though, straying away from such a faithful woman. I love PanF 50 and always seem to get deep rich blacks and vibrant whites that still retain detail. Post more efke shots when you get the chance.

tetrisattack

03-19-2006, 14:56

Wow, how timely! I've just tried my own first roll of Efke 25, and I found it to be quite interesting as well! I developed in Rodinal 1:50.

Half of the roll was just test shots of my deck, but I found that the film, at about three feet, was able to resolve the texture of pine needles.

One thing I noticed is that the film halates like crazy, highlights tend to get ugly and blocked pretty fast. The box says something like, "For maximum highlight separation expose at ISO 50 and use the following development times..." which is something I'll try on the next roll.

Here's my sample:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=30612

rbiemer

03-19-2006, 15:11

I have to stop looking at thes kinds of images. Now I will have to find another place to live so I can set up a darkroom. :bang:.
Beautiful stuff, gents!
Rob(that's me--green with envy :D )

Lemures-Ex

03-19-2006, 15:34

I've been developing this in Diafine shot at iso 40 and 50 for a few weeks now and the results are wonderful. I don't have a film scanner but I will try to scan some at work tomorrow...

Jared

Trius

03-19-2006, 15:43

Just what I need ... yet another film to try. Sigh. Thanks matti and tetris. I've gotta believe Rodinal is a perfect developer for this film.

Lemures-Ex

03-19-2006, 16:05

For anyone that lives in the SF Bay area: Looking Glass Photo in Berkeley sells Efke KB25 in 35mm and 120mm.

Jared

kaiyen

03-19-2006, 16:07

Hey there Matti,
First, I'm glad that you got some results with which you are so happy. That's terrific. And it's a great feeling, for sure.

Having said that...your scans, as are, look like you have overexposed your film. There is little in the way of shadows. Your highlights are actually well controlled, though.

Finally, whatever it is you like out of Efke, I am sure you can get out of another film. The grain will look different and the curve will be a bit different, but overall you can get pretty close. You just need to get your process calibrated and setup.

allan

Gordon Coale

03-19-2006, 16:15

I don't think there is another film as fine grained as Efke 25.

Stephanie Brim

03-19-2006, 17:54

I have a roll of APX 25 from a member here (stuff's like GOLD, I tell you)...I was pondering trying Efke 25 until he sent me that. I still haven't shot it. I'm pondering what to shoot with it at the moment. I doubt I'm going to find any ever again so I'm making it a much bigger decision than it really needs to be. ;)

peterc

03-19-2006, 17:59

This is wonderful.
I couldn't agree more. I have seven rolls of KB25 (repackaged as Maco UP25plus) waiting for some brighter days.

Peter

kaiyen

03-19-2006, 18:58

I just shot several rolls of APX25 and R25 (medium format) as a comparison. Initial impressions are very favorable for the R25 - I think it's smoother than the APX25 and creamier.

I will put up some tests on the community blog this week.

allan

sockeyed

03-19-2006, 19:25

Hibbs

03-19-2006, 20:11

Stephanie Brim

03-19-2006, 20:17

I may try some Efke, then. I plan to make an order at J&C for some films for both my Speedex and the Canon soon...I'll make sure to order some.

matti

03-19-2006, 21:06

Thanks for the comments!

When I was a kid I went with the axiom to stay with one film (Tri-x). But now when I am old ennough to decide myself I find that I learn something from every new film/developer I try :D .

Allan, maybe I should just expose my other films a bit more. Seriously, I think I often underexpose. And if I just touch the curves in Photoshop these pictures will have some deep shadows. But the negs look quite dark, could it be that the water we have is very soft? I read somewhare that Rodinal was sensitive towards that.

Jared, I'd like to look at some shots developed in Diafine. It's a nice thing to be able to develop different films at the same time.

tetrisattack, I didn't notice any strong halation. But maybe this is what gives the kind of "glow", I like about it ;)

/matti

matti

03-19-2006, 21:25

Hey there Matti,

Finally, whatever it is you like out of Efke, I am sure you can get out of another film. The grain will look different and the curve will be a bit different, but overall you can get pretty close. You just need to get your process calibrated and setup.

allan

Allan, I think you are right. I have been trying things a bit randomly and need to calibrate my setup, from exposure to scanning. When I look at the scans of my earlier tries, I find it hard to pinpoint what to change to get a different result. Often I don't even know what I don't like about the scanned image. (Hell I often even think I like it, that was before I saw the efke-shots, of course. :D ) I loaded the camera with some Tri-x and am planning on exposing it at 400 (That's a new one :D ) I have some D76 to mix up. Then what? (I probably should reread some really basic book about this. Maybe I'll understand it better now than when I was 14...)

/matti

clarence

03-19-2006, 22:26

Does anyone know if Macophot UP25 is the same emulsion as Efke 25?

Thanks.

Clarence

Ken F.

03-19-2006, 23:04

Nice shots sockeyed...is there anywhere in Vancouver that carries Efke? The reason I ask is that I have a Serb friend that will be returning home for vacation and is willing to bring me back some 120.

~Hibbs

Hibbs,

I buy mine from Beau Photo, 1520 W. 6th Ave., 604-734-7771.
They usually have the complete line in stock as well.

Cheers,
kf

Ken F.

03-19-2006, 23:10

[QUOTE=matti]This is wonderful. I developed my first roll of Efke 25 tonight and I was impressed as soon as I cracked open the film spiral. I could see a meter away that this was something else. The tri-x and ilford pictures that I have been taking looks gritty and dull compared to this.

Hi Matti,

I agree the Efke 25 is one of my favourite films as well. I also use the 100 quite often, although it is thinner and curls easily, both great films!

Regards,
kf

Lemures-Ex

03-19-2006, 23:33

Does anyone know if Macophot UP25 is the same emulsion as Efke 25?

Thanks.

Clarence

I have never seen any indication of this. I have shot both films and they look a little different however they both have an old fashioned sort of "glow" due to the thin emulsions.

Jared

Seele

03-20-2006, 01:45

Regarding halation...

Adox used to make a big statement saying how it incorporates effective measures to eliminate halation in its films, which are of course known as Efke now. I wonder if some of these anti-halation measures had been removed in the current products so as to give it the reputation of being prone to this fault.

Andy K

03-20-2006, 01:50

This just isn't fair! Now I'm going to have to buy some Efke25! ;) I wonder if the rumoured Ilford Delta 25 (if it ever happens) will look as good as the examples you guys have posted here?

matti

03-20-2006, 01:55

This just isn't fair! Now I'm going to have to buy some Efke25! ;) I wonder if the rumoured Ilford Delta 25 (if it ever happens) will look as good as the examples you guys have posted here?

I think it is fair, as it is a cheap film :) Also, 3 ml of rodinal isn't that expensive ;)
/matti

matti

03-20-2006, 01:59

I wonder if there is something good about thin or missing anti halation layer. Or if the problem with halation in bright spots might give a nice light to other subjects? I must say that I couldn't distinguish halation from some sort of out of focus highlights, so it's just a thought.

/matti

sfb_dot_com

03-20-2006, 04:16

Efke 25 is a beautiful emulsion with invisible grain and a classic look. Images almost have a liquid quality. Although I've only shot 2 rolls (and one is hanging up to try as I type), I'm already in love with it.

I've attached a couple of samples at medium resolution.

I'm getting a tingle!! and that means I like it. It's nice to see some fine-grained stuff here on RFF for a change, and is certainly something I'd like to try. I think I might start with the more readily available Pan f then if I need a bit more I'll try the EFKE.

BTW - Also looked at your snow pictures and really enjoyed them too

Andy

Bertram2

03-20-2006, 05:55

matti

03-20-2006, 07:29

... hope the tender greys come out as well as in your photos.

Best,
bertram

Thank's Bertram. The words tender greys really describes what I like about the film/dev. This is more interesting than the fine grain, I think.

/matti

kaiyen

03-20-2006, 08:57

Hey Matti,

Allan, maybe I should just expose my other films a bit more. Seriously, I think I often underexpose. And if I just touch the curves in Photoshop these pictures will have some deep shadows. But the negs look quite dark, could it be that the water we have is very soft? I read somewhare that Rodinal was sensitive towards that.

Well, exposure control is always tough. Setting the EI is one step, but proper metering is the other. If you are using any kind of averaging meter, and you like what you're getting out of those scans, perhaps you are underexposing with other film. Try rating all of them a bit slower - maybe TXT at 250 to start. That will help you get your exposure where you want it. The only problem with doing that across the board is that perhaps your "real" speed for TXT is 320, and you've now increased grain ever so slightly by overexposing by 1/3 of a stop.

When you say the negs are dark, do you mean as a negative or as a positive? If you mean as a negative, meaning they are dense, then you probably over-developed. The slower the film, the more inherently contrasty it is, and the more sensitive it is to development time. Reduce by at least 10% and see if that helps. It'll make scanning easier, too. Again, you gotta get your process calibrated.

I forget what Rodinal's response to soft water is...hm.

I find TXT in D76 1+1 to be closer to 320, using spot-metering of shadows. But you get a grittier look as you under expose, which is a classic look for TXT.

I just bulk-loaded 10 rolls of Efke 25 after reading your thread. I'll go shoot it next weekend. And I'll put up those R25 vs. APX 25 scans then, too. Happy shooting.

allan

tetrisattack

03-20-2006, 09:53

You know, regarding my earlier comment about how this film halates, I'm not so sure anymore if that's the case. O:)

Gosh, I wish I could just throw these things on light table so that the more experienced people could make their own evaluation.

What I mean is: the highlights blow, and they blow hard. I can't get any detail in my scans, neither with an epson flatbed or one of the school's nikon coolscans. It's like shooting with a DSLR all over again. And when the highlights blow, they also leak to adjacent areas of the film - the bloom doesn't spread far, but it makes for soft edges. Is this a film problem or a processing problem?

kaiyen

03-20-2006, 10:21

If it is blooming into other areas, that is halation, yes. An anti-halation layer should prevent that. However, I guess if you put enough exposure into an area that you'll get some halation no matter how good the AH is.

As I mentioned, slower films are more contrasty. You really gotta control highlight density during development.

allan

matti

03-20-2006, 12:53

Allan, thanks for the pointers. I will try to tweak the exposure as you suggest. And not do like I have done too much, to change all the parameters at the same time. (Well, maybe sometimes I will do that too. :D )

The negatives look contrasty and dense, so maybe I should a couple of minutes less developement for the next roll. Will that take down the highlights a bit without loosing the dark parts?

I should start to look at the negs a bit more carefully with the loupe, as the scanner does some auto levels stuff.

About the halation. I found a picture shot into the sun (that is behind the clouds) that shows some of this, I think. The small branch of the tree seems eaten by the light. If I used my flatbed for scanning it, it wouldn't be noticable, though. I am enclosing the picture and an enlargement.

/matti

sockeyed

03-22-2006, 11:06

As Ken F. mentioned, Beau Photo in Vancouver has a stock of Efke in 25 and 100 in 35mm, but they seem to be out of everything in 120 and don't carry any 50.

I noticed something interesting with the Ekfe: vegetation sometimes comes out almost white, almost like an IR film. It must have something to do with its sensitivity to green wavelengths.

filmgoerjuan

03-22-2006, 11:46

I've only shot one roll of Efke 25 (only had one chance so far this season for decent weather, with enough light) and I have to say that it's become an instant favourite. The grain, what there is of it, is spectacular. Examples attached (developed in HC-110)

kaiyen

03-22-2006, 11:59

Matti,
Yes - reduce development. Exposure controls shadows, and development controls highlights. It is acceptably accurate to say that reducing development time by up to, say, 30% will not affect your shadow detail. If you want to get really into it, I can explain why that's not 100% correct, but it's close enough for your purposes.

I don't think that's really halation. Perhaps the film just can't resolve the detail from such a thin subject in front of such an intense backlight? I wouldn't worry about it in general.

The spectral sensitivity graph for R25 doesn't indicate any real increased sensitivity to green. It does have a tremendously reduced response to red, of course. I will have to shoot some vegetation and figure out if it's different. All film should be a bit more sensitive to yellow-green, though. But going pure white is something else entirely.

allan

matti

03-22-2006, 12:25

I shot almost one new roll of efke 25 today. I think I will reduce developement time and/or maybe agitation and see what I get. I saw somewhere that efke is ortho/panchromatic, whatever that means. So I put a yellow filter on the camera today (oh! so now I will change two things at the same time ... again!)
/matti

kaiyen

03-22-2006, 12:41

Matti,
Usually, you want to change one thing at a time. Unless you are agitating a LOT, I would stick to your agitation regimen and just reduce time. If you find that you're getting into some short times - close to 5 minutes - and still have too much density then consider reducing agitation, as well. But unitl that point just adjust your times.

You're metering through the lens, right? In that case you would have compensated for the filter without a problem. The yellow should slightly help, yes. It will slightly darken the blues and greens (the orthochromatic part means it's over-sensitive to blue) and lighten the reds just a tad. Personally, I might have gone with just a plain red filter. But I haven't tried it yet so who knows.

allan

Seele

03-22-2006, 16:29

Consulting my Adox technical information sheets (yes, they are the original ones when still in Frankfurt), these films were mad with "triple anti-halation protection", as in using a very thin emulsion layer, grey-coloured film base and light-absorbing backing lacquer. These of course make the Adox films much superior to the other early films, for they were the first true single-coated thin emulsion films anyway.

Matti, with the exception of the 21-type (ISO 100) films which are standard panchromatic, the slower ones are ortho-panchromatic which means they have extended green sensitivity.

Mackinaw

03-22-2006, 17:16

Another Efke 25 shot. Developed in Rodinal.

Jim Bielecki

titrisol

03-23-2006, 05:23

Yes EFKE 25 is beautiful, even though its red sensitivity is kinda low.
Rodinal 1+100 worked for me as well

I'll use a lot of that next week to copy a bunch of pictures I recovered from my grammas house ;)

oftheherd

03-23-2006, 05:38

I keep telling myself to get some, and I will yet. I want it in 120 and 4x5 if not 35mm. I used some of that 25-30 years ago and really liked it. If I recall, I bought if from Freestyle when they used to advertise in Modern Photography. That stuff was great in 35mm, and in 120 ... wow.

titrisol

03-23-2006, 05:42

in the US JandC carry it, I thinkg it will change its name to ADOX pretty soon.

Some Efke films are now starting to be labeled under the original ADOX name. When you order these films you may receive either Efke or ADOX branded product. These are the same products using the original ADOX name.

Steph: yes it is available on most sheet sizes.... I have only used it in 35mm though

Stephanie Brim

03-23-2006, 05:43

Imagine it in 4x5...or 8x10...or 11x14... ;)

matti

03-23-2006, 07:44

I haven't seen the 25 and 50 in anything else than 35 and 120. But the efke 100 is available in everything, even 127-format.
/matti

kaiyen

03-23-2006, 08:22

It looks like the 25 is available in 5x7 (nice) 8x10 and 11x14.

I aim to use a combination of PL25, Fomapan 200, and J&C 400 to cover my film speeds. I might try either the PL100 or the Fomapan 100 instead of the 200 (which I shoot at 125 anyway in Rodinal 1+50...), but I got about 30 sheets left of the T200.

One thing to remember is that it's not always wise to use the slowest possible speed with LF. Those cameras can really move in the wind, and at f45 that's one long shutter speed.

allan

sockeyed

03-23-2006, 09:29

Here are a few more Efke 25 samples. The first three are shot on my R3A + Nokton 40 S.C.; the musicians are shot on the R3A + 1961 Jupiter-8. The roll was developed in Rodinal 1+100.

I love the results, but this isn't an easy film to use! On a bright day in light shadow I was shooting wide open at 1/30.

titrisol

03-23-2006, 09:43

Nice pictures, the musician seem overexposed? or is it just me

I agree, needing a tripod is a RPITA but for tripod photography thi siflm is awesome.

matti

03-23-2006, 10:00

Nice pictures. Are the trees green? Is this how they will look?

/matti

sockeyed

03-23-2006, 10:23

The musicians look pretty good on my monitors at work and home althought I'd be curious to know if other people find them overexposed.

The trees were definitely green, so I was surprised by how they came out. Other foliage seems to come out more normal, though. The film must have some interesting sensitivities in the green wavelengths.

Stephanie Brim

03-23-2006, 11:30

When someone says that Efke is a curly film, they mean it! I'm drying some of the Efke 100 127 film I got for use in the Falcon Miniature (which I got and shot this roll with, by the way) and the film is curling like mad. I put two of my unweighted clips on the end to hold it...one didn't quite do it.

matti

03-23-2006, 12:16

Yes, it curles while it dries, but becomes flat later in the binder. But then, I dry my film in the scanner :D

/matti

kaiyen

03-23-2006, 22:01

All of the thin emulsion films are curly - efke and forte, notably. However, if you are drying in a humid environment, they shouldn't be too bad when they come out. I run my water distiller when I'm developing so there is a good amount of moisture in the air by the time I'm ready to dry.

Gotta shoot some R25 this weekend...

allan

tetrisattack

04-01-2006, 20:53

That's it, I'm ordering a bulk roll of this stuff. Two rolls and I'm convinced, it's got the look. I might buy a box of 4x5" while I'm at it!

Gordy, if you're reading this: is that kodak Brownie box camera in the 1st pic the one you were telling me to seek out?

On second thought, I don't know what would really be gained by shooting this stuff in sheets, even my normal diet of tri-x looks fine-grained when I enlarge from 4x5.

These shots in rodinal 1:50.

Gordon Coale

04-01-2006, 22:40

I have a box of 4x5 Efke 25 that has been sitting in the the fridge for some months now -- no darkroom (yet.) But I just ran my first 120 roll through my Salut-S because of this thread. (I'm sending it off to Panda Lab in Seattle.) I keep going over to the fridge and opening it up to look at that box of 50 sheets of 4x5. I think I may need to get some 35mm, too.

My Brownie is different. There are hundreds of different Brownies over the years. Here is mine: Brownie pics (http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00005931.htm)