Identify a film please... # 2524

[Jan Normandale]

I shot some film three years ago. I'm now scanning it and I cannot tell from the numeric code what the film is. The number is 2524 and I've run all the searches I can to no avail. I cannot believe this isn't noted somewhere. I usually shoot Kodak but I don't find reference to the code when searching for Kodak numeric codes.

[steven_e007]

I've just checked the usual sourves and couldn't find it, either.

This doesn't surprise me. I have some aero-graphic film with an 'unknown' number on it. A few months ago I contacted Kodak UK and asked them what the number referred to. They were good enough to investigate and copied me in on an email from Kodak technical support in the US. They said they had no record of this number - yet I have boxes of film with it stamped on the label.

Makes me think that maybe some of these numbers were associated with specific orders or batches and once the delivery had been fulfilled, maybe the references were discarded?

[Mike Wilde]

Those 4 digit numbers sure can be tricky. I was at a camera show last year and saw a 4 digit one, in a 35mm 100' bulk load can. It sort of was what I remembered was the high speed one that I shot as a kid when tri -x was too slow... 2475. So on a lark I paid $5 for it.

Well, high speed it wasn't. Billed as 'high speed direct positive' it has a tunsten spped of iso 0.12. I am glad it was not the ordinary speed direct duplicating film!

[George Collier]

What format is it? It looks something like 4x5, is there a knotch code?

[Jan Normandale]

@ Steve, I'm pretty sure it's Kodak, I've not seen this on Ilford or Fuji and those are the only three I use. It's good film for sure scans well and is flat as a prairie

@ Mike.. 0.12 ISO!!! That sounds like watching paint dry... any images to share?

@ George, it's 120 actually George. I've got a notch code file for LF which is another topic ;D

[cmacd123]

Kodak also recycles the codes from time to time. The first digit is tied into the base and size which also puts a damper on the available number of codes. (For example Double-X Negative is 5222 in 35mm and wider and 7222 in 16mm and smaller)

[Jan Normandale]

Kodak also recycles the codes from time to time. The first digit is tied into the base and size which also puts a damper on the available number of codes. (For example Double-X Negative is 5222 in 35mm and wider and 7222 in 16mm and smaller)

Thanks Charles, that's an interesting piece of information. Based on the responses I'm getting I think I'm going to be lucky if someone can identify this. If I was to guess I'd say it's Tri X because it's my regular Kodak BW which I shoot that more than any other Kodak BW

[Christopher Colley]

theres a few posts by someone here on apug referencing 2524 as an 70mm IR Film..

[sepiareverb]

Could it be a Rollei or Adox film Jan? They usually have the name on them, but with all the various versions of some of those European films I've had some with nothing on it at all. Not of much help, but perhaps a jog to the old memory circuits...

[Mike Wilde]

[QUOTE=Jan Normandale;1265833@ Mike.. 0.12 ISO!!! That sounds like watching paint dry... any images to share?[/QUOTE]

I was thinking about putting it into a holder that can fit on the back of a 700mm f/10 el cheapo telescope, and using it to image the sun.

I have a 'nikon' body that Polaroid onsold with thier industrial MP copy cameras. It has no shutter, but full frame and half frame 35mm film advance.

I just need to figure out what the focus tube on the scope has to be set to, and make up a 39mm to square plate that mates with the holes in the present polariod/nikon body.

I might see some sun in a few more weeks, if the weatehr turns, but right now all sorts of other projects and work seem to keep me tied up.

If slow films degrade more slowly than fast films, I think I can find this stuff still 'viable' in another 40 years.