Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,963   Posts: 1,558,339   Online: 846
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    Thanks fschifano. You mention going with manf's times but in using D76 what agitation did you use - the Ed Buffalo one, the Ilford one or one in between? Given the age of the film and Ed' agitation I am inclined towards Ed's but what agitation did you go with?

    To all. I should have mentioned that it is Verichrome Pan in 620 not 120 but as far as I can recall, a 120 reel will accept 620 film. Am I righ and any other things to watch out for in loading?

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Van Buren, Arkansas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,412
    Images
    101
    620 film and 120 film is exactly the same film, The only difference is the shape of the spool it is wound on. No special concern about loading on processing reels.

    Many, many people choose to develop vintage film in Kodak HC-110 dilution B, as this developer is very clean working and minimizes age fog. I think Ilford makes an equivalent. This comes as a liquid concentrate that has an amazing shelf life (years) even in open bottles. You use HC-110 as a single-use solution, mixing up a working solution for each tank of film you process.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    Thanks fschifano. You mention going with manf's times but in using D76 what agitation did you use - the Ed Buffalo one, the Ilford one or one in between? Given the age of the film and Ed' agitation I am inclined towards Ed's but what agitation did you go with?
    Thirty seconds continuous agitation to start, then 5 seconds of good vigorous agitation each 30 seconds to completion. Unless I have a good reason to do it differently, that's my standard.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    Claes. Just one more question. Is your recommended development time of 9 mins for Rodinal based on 20 degrees C? John Welton's recommendation on Ed Buffalo's site is 10 mins at 22 degrees centigrade and this is based on EI 80 instead of ISO125. As exposure at EI 80 suggests that a shorter development time might be better than at ISO 125, this suggests that I should maybe go for at least the full 10 mins which is what you use for RO9 even if this is at 20 degrees centrigrade.

    However knowing your temperature will help me decide by how much I should maybe go beyond 10 mins. I think that based all of the above facts I should go for at least 10 mins and maybe 10% more which is 11 mins.

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  5. #15
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Plus X times always worked perfectly for me with VP120 and Rodinal is a really fine developer for VP because VP tended to be a bit mushy in the high tones. It benefited greatly from the nice separation given by Rodinal.

    In my opinion, VP Pan was one of the best kept secrets in medium format films. Very forgiving, long-scale film, oft maligned as an "amateur" film.

    John, Mount Vernon, VA USA

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,101
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    Claes. Just one more question. Is your recommended development time of 9 mins for Rodinal based on 20 degrees C? John Welton's recommendation on Ed Buffalo's site is 10 mins at 22 degrees centigrade and this is based on EI 80 instead of ISO125. As exposure at EI 80 suggests that a shorter development time might be better than at ISO 125, this suggests that I should maybe go for at least the full 10 mins which is what you use for RO9 even if this is at 20 degrees centrigrade.

    However knowing your temperature will help me decide by how much I should maybe go beyond 10 mins. I think that based all of the above facts I should go for at least 10 mins and maybe 10% more which is 11 mins.

    Thanks

    pentaxuser
    Yes, I have developed the film at 20 C.

    I usually end up with rather short development times, compared to other users, when using Rodinal or R09 – so you might want to prolong development a bit. On the other hand – longer development can result in more fog…

    You should also bear in mind that I don’t know what EI my father used when he exposed the old films I have developed. I know for a fact that he did not use a light meter (apparently he did not need one. He has left an archive comprising of thousands of very well exposed Kodachrome slides from the sixties and seventies). However, when he taught me the basics of B&W photography he advised me to base my exposures on the shadows and that it is usually better to use a lower EI than the stated speed of a B&W film. I can only presume that he followed his own advice.

    Cheers

    Claes

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    To all. I developed the film last night in Rodinal at 11mins and 20 degrees C with 30 secs agitation to begin then 2 inversions every 30 secs. Results were pretty much as I expected from a film so old. The first three negs had developed OK but had high base fog as I was warned about. There were no light leaks despite being rolled and put in a drawer for years. However the photographer had stopped after three negs and he/she or someone else had then extracted the film and rolled it up but fatally had done so loosely as there were light leaks at regular intervals on the rest of the emulsion. Fortunately there were no exposures there anyway. So luck played a part in that the first three negs were so far embedded in the roll that even rolled loosely the light failed to penetrate that far down.

    It was probably not a fair test of Rodinal due to high base fog and maybe I have a bias against Rodinal having used it on 35mm but there still seemed to be a characteristic graininess despite the negs being 6x9.

    Claes. I think that maybe your recommendation of 10 mins would have been better. I don't think it needed any extra development because of its age. The backing paper was crimson with yellow writing so probably late 1950s or early 60s. At what point did Verichrome Pan change from a crimson backing with yellow writing? At least this will give me a latest date by which this particular film had to be produced. Thanks

    One lesson for the future I must remember is: Beware of loose rolls. I need to tape the end down very tightly and probably not delay in processing. Can you get a film container for 120 as you do for 35mm? I have had problems with what I think was a loose roll last time in my Agfa Isolette 1 and I am tempted to extract the next roll in darkness, roll the end very tight and if not processing it on the spot then transfer to a container which I will open only in the dark. At least that way I'll eliminate one cause of the faint light(?) streaks on my previous roll.

    Anyway thanks all, once again. Without APUG I could have spent forever trying to find out about Verichrome Pan development and still not have succeeded.

    pentaxuser

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    Sorry to be like a dog with a bone here but I'd like to see if a further check is possible on the age of my Verichrome Pan film. It does have the crimson backing paper and the yellow writing which Claes tells me means it was dated sometime between the late 50s to early 60s

    Can anyone tell me what the earliest and latest date might be from the description of the backing paper and writing? There was presumably a point in time when either Verichrome Pan ceased to be produced or something changed about the backing paper in the same way that Ilford changed the writing on its FP4+ cassette a few years ago.

    I have since learned that with 35mm Ilford films, all have a code on the emulsion which when quoted tells Ilford what the date of production was. There was no such code or any identifying letters/numbers on the edge of the Verichrome Pan that I could see. Perhaps Kodak didn't bother with such things way back then but if there is any way to identify the age of the film or a Kodak contact I could use to at least identify the beginning and end dates of this film with a crimson backing paper and yellow writing in the form of "cursive script" I'd be glad to know of it.

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    429
    It can't be any earlier than about 1957, since that's when Verichrome Pan replaced Verichrome.

    There may be a graphic date code printed on the edge of the film, but there may not. The plant code is a dot somewhere in the Kodak Safety Film lettering.

    The classic looking yellow paper went on for a long time. At least until the 1980's. Note the film speed -- is it 80, 100, or 125? Is the Kodak logo serif or sans-serif?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    Quote Originally Posted by John Shriver View Post
    It can't be any earlier than about 1957, since that's when Verichrome Pan replaced Verichrome.

    There may be a graphic date code printed on the edge of the film, but there may not. The plant code is a dot somewhere in the Kodak Safety Film lettering.

    The classic looking yellow paper went on for a long time. At least until the 1980's. Note the film speed -- is it 80, 100, or 125? Is the Kodak logo serif or sans-serif?
    Thanks John. The film is definitely 125. It says so on the backing paper. The Kodak logo is in yellow and serif. The end backing paper when the film is wound off after exposure is a red/crimson colour. At the beginning there are simple instructions along the "sunny f16" rule and these are in black on a yellow backing. So end of roll writing is yellow on crimson and beginning is black on yellow.

    Nothing else to identify date etc. PE said that in Kodak 620 of this age there were no codes or other identification along the edge of the emulsion and there is nothing else to establish date on the backing paper.

    He went on to suggest that I ring the Kodak toll free number where help could be provided. Well there is such a toll free number in the U.S. but in the U.K. it is a 0870 number which is actually more expensive than ringing the Harrow, U.K. head office direct! This may be an oversight on Kodak UK's part but I doubt it and if not then it speaks volumes about Kodak's attitude to its UK customers compared to its US customers. There is no e-mail address either

    I checked the UK site fully and it lists 3 print films only Ultra Max 400, Kodak Gold 200 and the Chromogenic B&W film Pro BW400CN. No trad B&W such as old TMax, no Portra, no mention of the new TMax etc.Compared with the Ilford site it's a joke. Don't they want new custom?

    I wasn't anti Kodak before trying the site but in all honesty Kodak seem to be doing very little to win over UK potential customers. However maybe feelings based on my findings are for another thread.

    Oh there is a UK toll free number but only for the Kodak Picture Support Kiosk! This may say everything about Kodak's view of its few remaining Analogue customers

    pentaxuser - a little disillusioned with Kodak

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