Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,936   Posts: 1,585,632   Online: 711
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,011
    Images
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    In addition to the change in standards, some of the films changed over time as the technology improved, and those changes included changes in sensitivity.

    In some cases, old films were replaced with new films with different names. In other cases the names didn't change.

    Like Vericolour, which went from ASA 125 to ASA 160, and was still called Vericolour.

    Although that may have been when it went from Vericolour I to Vericolour II (or was it II to III?).
    Lol that still doesn't answer the OP's question about the 3 films listed on his camera haha


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #12
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,955
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Lol that still doesn't answer the OP's question about the 3 films listed on his camera haha


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    No, but it does help explain why the film names themselves are of such little help.

    Another factor that needs to be considered as well is that what constitutes a standard for exposure for "snapshot" cameras now may very well be significantly different than the standard when the OP's camera was current.

    I have a few negatives from around that period, and they look today to be both over-exposed and over-developed. I believe that manufacturer's recommendations then were oriented toward drug store processing and avoiding under-exposure, at all costs.

    So I would be careful about using those recommendations without backing it up with testing.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Morganton, NC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    172
    Like Vericolour, which went from ASA 125 to ASA 160, and was still called Vericolour.

    Although that may have been when it went from Vericolour I to Vericolour II (or was it II to III?).[/QUOTE]


    Matt, I think it was II to III they made that change. I remember ordering some II and they sent III. I was nervous since I hadn't tested the new film and had to shoot a wedding the next day. I think I shot it at 100 ASA just to make sure I had something. I couldn't tell a difference except the colors had to be reprogrammed into the printers and analyzers. They were a little off from the II film. I'm not really sure it wasn't just a base change in the new version. My memory is a little foggy since it has been a long time ago.

    Richard

  4. #14
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    5
    I have a few negatives from around that period, and they look today to be both over-exposed and over-developed.
    So do I as well as some from the teens and 1920's and I would agree that they certainly look over-developed. Actually, they look almost exactly like my own hand-made film when it is over-developed which is one reason I believe the technology (or lack thereof) behind them is basically the same. The film I make now and especially the negatives I have from the 20's look very, very similar in most respects and that's where this whole question really started.

    Also, FWIW, there is an unopened box of 120 Super-XX of 1948 vintage listed on eBay right now. The seller has good,clear photos of the box and no speed is shown on the box at all. If the seller's asking prices weren't quite so high I would consider buying a few boxes to investigate.

    Googling Super-XX, I have seen ASA speeds given from 64 to 200. I could go along with 64 but IDK about 200. Again though, maybe in 1947 they were still intentionally overexposing and the Sunny 16 rule doesn't quite apply. I'm not really sure this model of the Tourist (with the anaston lens) was considered a mass snapshot camera.
    All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

  5. #15
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,011
    Images
    227
    I could swear super XX is 200 ASA because the SUPER was because it was "fast" now could have been 100ASA before the change in standard lol


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #16
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,955
    Images
    60
    Looking at the manual for the Kodak Tourist: http://www.cameramanuals.org/kodak_p...ak_tourist.pdf

    Interpolating from the recommendations there, and using Sunny 16 as the standard, I read the sensitivities of Verichrome Pan, Plus-X and Kodacolor to be equivalent to the current ISO of 25, whereas Super XX sensitivity appears to have been equivalent to the current ISO of 50.

    This is the same as Jason's initial observations.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  7. #17
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,011
    Images
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Looking at the manual for the Kodak Tourist: http://www.cameramanuals.org/kodak_p...ak_tourist.pdf

    Interpolating from the recommendations there, and using Sunny 16 as the standard, I read the sensitivities of Verichrome Pan, Plus-X and Kodacolor to be equivalent to the current ISO of 25, whereas Super XX sensitivity appears to have been equivalent to the current ISO of 50.

    This is the same as Jason's initial observations.
    Well then I may have way under-exposed my verichrome pan 127 roll just now LOL shooting it at EI16 based on an assumed ASA of 64 (before the standard change).


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #18
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    5
    WOW! Thanks, Matt. I never looked for a manual before - although I have been on that site many times.
    All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,181
    From Wall's Dictionary of Photography 16th ed c1943:
    "Most makers of film offer films of four different types,two orthochromatic and two panchromatic.The first two are the ordinary or standard film speed of about 25 degrees Scheiner....and the chrome film of about double the speed of the ordinary film.....they are known as chrome films....Verichrome,Isochrom,Selochrome etc.Of the panchromatic films one,in most makes sold as a fine grain film, has a speed that is usually between that of the chrome and ordinary films, while the speed of the other is usually about double that of the chrome film."
    The table converts degrees Scheiner to ASA, my guess that it is old ASA,not sure on this.Scheiner is very likely 25 European, it is a UK book.

    http://static.photo.net/attachments/...0-34975684.pdf

  10. #20
    Jim Noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,909
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    I could swear super XX is 200 ASA because the SUPER was because it was "fast" now could have been 100ASA before the change in standard lol


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    Super XX was not rated at 200. It was rated at 100 Weston. I still have a little bit left and continue to use that speed. I don't bother to convert it to ISO/ASA because one of my meters is in Weston ratings. No, Weston ratings had nothing to do with Edward or his sons.
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Films NOT Dead - Just getting fixed![/FONT]

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin