Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,919   Posts: 1,584,779   Online: 956
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20130606.010455-1497340734.JPG 
Views:	38 
Size:	305.5 KB 
ID:	69722I just happened to have a roll of Kodacolor lying around that expired in 1974. Familiar?

  2. #12
    hchapman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    10
    That looks like it.
    To my shame not knowing this, is Kodacolor negative or transparency, and would a modern color lab be able to develop it?
    hchapman

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34
    Kodacolor is a color negative film. It's processed C-22, which has to be made in batches as this chemistry hasn't been produced in decades. This is only available at a handful of labs. If this is indeed the film you are dealing with and you can't source the chemical components and run c-22 yourself, expect to spend 30-40 dollars a roll having a lab do it with a turn around time of 1-6 months. But I now have some doubts that this is the film you're dealing with. The film base is very dark black with a nearly purple reflection. I dropped some of this in regular Kodak fixer to see if it reacted like your film. It turned dark pinkish tan and the black film base turned perfectly clear, but this was only discernable after wiping the softened emulsion off with a rag. I didn't try putting it into a developer first. Those results sound somewhat different than the results you described, so it may be another film stock from that era.

  4. #14
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,988
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Clovis Blevins View Post
    Kodacolor is a color negative film. It's processed C-22, which has to be made in batches as this chemistry hasn't been produced in decades. This is only available at a handful of labs. If this is indeed the film you are dealing with and you can't source the chemical components and run c-22 yourself, expect to spend 30-40 dollars a roll having a lab do it with a turn around time of 1-6 months. But I now have some doubts that this is the film you're dealing with. The film base is very dark black with a nearly purple reflection. I dropped some of this in regular Kodak fixer to see if it reacted like your film. It turned dark pinkish tan and the black film base turned perfectly clear, but this was only discernable after wiping the softened emulsion off with a rag. I didn't try putting it into a developer first. Those results sound somewhat different than the results you described, so it may be another film stock from that era.
    I have only seen (not yet attempted) to develop c-22 in c-41 and the instructions were to keep the temp at 70 degrees and develop it for 20 minutes, the c-22 can't handle the high heat of c-41, but will still develop it similarly with color after the color step.

    Again, just what I've read.


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

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34
    I've seen some photos on the Internet of c-22 developed that way. Results were poor, but this could be due to lack of a good solvent such as benzyl alcohol to help carry the agents into the emulsion. Note that this process was discontinued around the time the EPA was formed. Benzyl alcohol isn't a very environmentally friendly solvent to go down the drain. Good luck.

  6. #16
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,988
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Clovis Blevins View Post
    I've seen some photos on the Internet of c-22 developed that way. Results were poor, but this could be due to lack of a good solvent such as benzyl alcohol to help carry the agents into the emulsion. Note that this process was discontinued around the time the EPA was formed. Benzyl alcohol isn't a very environmentally friendly solvent to go down the drain. Good luck.
    So you suggest putting that as an additive? How much would you add? Would it ruin the C-41 chemistry for following that with regular C-41 films?


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

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    34
    I haven't tried it, but I imagine it would increase the activity inversely proportional to the depth within the emulsion. The first thing that comes to mind is that since different depths within the emulsion respond to different colors, you might see a color shift. It would be interesting.

  8. #18
    hchapman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    10

    C41 development, some progress but still a puzzle

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	C41 Dev 6-17-13001 copy.jpg 
Views:	15 
Size:	420.6 KB 
ID:	70543
    I picked up a C41 developing kit and used it to develop one of these unknown type rolls of film along with a roll of Portra 400 as a control. The Portra developed fine. The unknown film came out looking chocolate brown on the emulsion side and black on the film base side. Holding it up to bright light there are hints of images through a dark purple brown base. Was able to barely pick up an example on a scanner. It was scanned as a color negative but I can't tell if the images are color or monochrome through a colored base.
    Does this sound like Kodachrome or would it be worth processing a roll as transparency film at a lab?
    Thank you for your help on this.
    -Harlan
    hchapman

  9. #19
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,988
    Images
    226
    Are you sure it's not just B&W film? LOL.




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

  10. #20
    hchapman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    10

    It isn't BW film

    The first thing I tried was developing it as BW film, didn't work, just got black emulsion with no hint of image. The C41 processing produced at least a bit of image.
    hchapman

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