Gdańsk on Rollei Retro 80S

A few words about the film itself. It is made by Agfa (as all Rollei film stocks that I'm aware of are) in Belgium. This film is most likely a rebranded Agfa Aviphot Pan 80, a specialised film created with aerial surveillance photography in mind. It is a superpanchromatic film, meaning that it responds not only to all wavelengths of visible light but also to some infrared; according to the spec sheet, its sensitivity expands to the near-infrared range of wavelengths, up to about 750 nm. In theory, this means that infrared-emitting subjects will appear brighter. For instance, in portraiture, human skin will look paler. Other features of the film stock advertised by the manufacturer are its high contrast, very fine grain and impressive resolving power (possibly a derivative of the fine grain structure), second to only the ISO 25 film stocks from Rollei's lineup. Also, the film is made using a transparent polyester carrier, which should make negative scans a little easier to convert to a usable image.

According to some online sources, Rollei Retro 80S responds well to pulling (ie, overexposing and underdeveloping), but not so much to pushing (underexposing and overdeveloping). The latter is said to produce unpalatable contrast for -1 EV and muddy results for -2 EV. I cannot really test this since I don't develop my own film.

From a budget perspective, this film is quite possibly the cheapest option that does not involve bulk loading or re-spooling. I was able to find the 35 mm version, 36 exposures, for 27 PLN, which corresponds to €6.35 or just shy of $7 per roll, at least as of today's exchange rate. If it's any good, it might become one of my favourite film stocks.

On a side note, this was my first attempt at scanning the negatives myself instead of paying for a scan. I was never fully satisfied with the studio scans. I'll describe my scanning setup in a separate post at some point.

I loaded the roll of Rollei Retro 80S into my Nikon F100 on an early morning. The idea was to move around the city centre freely, without running into crowds of tourists. I limited my route to a fairly small area: the Main City, the Old Suburb, the Lower City and the Granary Island. The sky was overcast initially but the sun peeked through the clouds later during the photowalk so I was able to take pictures in soft and harsh light. Considering the film's naturally high contrast, this might constitute a meaningful test.

First Impressions: Contrast, Grain, Detail

I started my walk around the Old Suburb's Lowland Gate, then quickly moved to the adjacent Żubr Bastion. Straight off the bat, the film proved very capable when photographing architecture. Even in soft light, the film's contrasty emulsion brought out detail in the old buildings' masonry. Interestingly, the deep shadows were full of detail that was only waiting to be brought out by a slight local exposure boost or a tone curve adjustment. I left it mostly alone though in order not to make the images flat. The grain immediately turned out to be super fine, just as advertised. As a result, the resolution is excellent.

Here are a few other shots featuring brick buildings in the area.

Response to Overexposure

I photographed the river Motława and its bridges, along with the famous Crane, in harsher light. Again, despite a contrasty emulsion, the photos turned out nice. While these haven't been edited in any way, I noticed that a bit of burning in the sky brings out tons of cloud detail. Apparently, the film isn't prone to losing detail in overexposed areas quite as quickly as I'd feared.

Response to Underexposure

I wasn't planning on underexposing my photos, but a rookie mistake made me do it anyway. Without an ND1000 filter, I could not make a suitably long exposure, so I opted for a multiple exposure of 8 images. I started by lowering the exposure compensation to -3 EV, but the shutter speed turned out so high that I was afraid of running into the reciprocity failure area. I opted for an ND8 filter instead... and forgot to reset the exposure compensation. As a result, I underexposed a total of 8 frames by 3 stops before noticing my settings were wrong.

I was certain the images would turn out unusable. The images on the negative were very thin. To my surprise, despite some difficulties in recovering the photos, a 3-stop underexposure still provided a shocking amount of detail. The cost of this was shifting midtones down into the shadows area, creating a rather unique look, with an even starker contrast.

The examples below were developed using Filmomat SmartConvert software and further tweaked in darktable: tone curve adjustment was applied to soften the stark contrast and bring out some additional detail from the deep shadows.

I could probably attempt to bring the shadows out a little more but that could make the images a bit flat. Plus, I like the aesthetic they have this way.

Conclusion

Overall, I have to say that I'm impressed by the results I've got from this film. I've another roll waiting to be shot and I believe it won't stay in the fridge for long. I can confirm everything the manufacturer (or rather, the distributor) says about his film stock: it's contrasty, sharp and has a super fine grain. With a sensitivity of 80 or just 1/3 EV below my usual choice of 100, it remains fairly flexible and unless the lighting conditions are poor, outdoor shots usually don't require a tripod.

Having said that, soft transitions between shadows and highlights aren't something this film stock is good at. This may or may not be a good thing, depending on what artistic effects are desired in a given scenario. I happen to like it, especially the shadowy look of the underexposed photographs.

I wasn't able to tell the difference between the Rollei Retro 80S and panchromatic film in terms of the near-infrared light sensitivity. As far as I'm concerned, this is a general-use film stock that I'd never qualify as a special effects one.

My final verdict is clear: I find this film very competent, even more so considering its affordable price. I'll use it more often.