127 film

CMoore · Jun 30, 2018

A friend sent these negatives to me to print. He thinks they are circa 1948. I guess they are not "Safety Film".?
They have been rolled up for decades, i tried for two weeks to get them to flatten out, but with no luck.
Right now this is all one piece of film.
One of my main questions is...should i wash this stuff at all.?
They look pretty good, but i am not used to dealing with film this old.
Should i just cut them smaller, put them in the Neg Carrier and see what happens.?
Thank You

BAC1967 · Jun 30, 2018

Safety film was around before the 1940’s. I would see what you can do with them as they are before you get them wet.

John Salim · Jun 30, 2018

Only option..... use a glass carrier !

John S

guangong · Jun 30, 2018

All questions have been answered. Now time to print. From your scans, negs look good to me. Have fun!

MattKing · Jun 30, 2018

Does your friend have a hungry, rogue alligator that has a hankering for old negatives?
Even with a glass carrier I think you are going to need some tape.

CMoore · Jun 30, 2018

MattKing said:
Does your friend have a hungry, rogue alligator that has a hankering for old negatives?
Even with a glass carrier I think you are going to need some tape.

They were stored in his parents attic.
Are mice known to eat film for some reason.?
I DO have a glass carrier of one sort or another. Not sure what you guys do in this situation.....assuming it is of a bigger size, just mask the unneeded area of the glass.?
I was surprised i even had the right holder for 127 film.
I had never even heard of 127 until he sent me these. I was thinking he meant 120, and simply made a typo.

John Salim · Jun 30, 2018

Yes, just use a glass carrier and mask the image..... this helps reduce flare ( and thus retain contrast ).
If the film is very curly and you use a glassless carrier, you still may have focus issues as the centre of the neg could be higher than the corners.

John S

CMoore · Jun 30, 2018

10-4...Thank You

Sirius Glass · Jun 30, 2018

A glass carrier would help. Using tape may bring other problems getting the tape adhesive off without causing further damage.

CMoore · Jun 30, 2018

I have some of that "Easy Release" Clear/Scotch tape. It is pretty innocuous.....AND it works well in our scenario.

John Salim · Jul 1, 2018

..... sorry.... to be clear I meant using masking tape on the glass and not the film itself.

John S

DWThomas · Jul 1, 2018

While most of my interest that brought me here to APUG is analog, I do plenty of digital stuff and I have to admit this situation might be best approached with a "latest technology" method. The "127 film" caught my eye, as about a year ago a friend brought me a set of negatives believed to have been taken by his father-in-law during WWII military service. They looked to be 127, and while the basic strip of film was in far better shape than those you show (no alligator chomps!), there had been some stains and scrapes here and there from the stuff laying around poorly protected for 70+ years. He was hoping to wind up with some prints, as there was belief that his FIL was in some. So I figured to start by scanning them ("do no harm") and did so, doing a little tweaking to try to subdue some of the damage. At that point I made the scans accessible over the web and sent him a link, hoping to reduce the number of frames I needed to spend further time on.

Turns out, in one of the ones I felt was in the best condition, his FIL was one of several guys sitting on the barrel of a rather large howitzer. And my friend felt the scans printed (gasp!) digitally would be more than sufficient. As someone who has done some darkroom work in the past he appreciated that it could take a lot of work to not get anything much better. So that brought that project to a happy end. My friend's wife is one of five daughters who now have a picture of their dad as a youthful artilleryman (or whatever).

Just my unsolicited 1.3 (after tax) cents,

CMoore · Jul 1, 2018

Right.....i THINK my glass is A Lot Bigger than 127.
I was thinking of using that stuff to make the first outline, just because it is so small and straight. Then use paper or gaffers tape to fill in the big space.
Anyway.....it would probably Help if i figured out what i have FIRST, and then devise a plan to deal with it.

Thanks Again

CMoore · Jul 1, 2018

DWThomas said:
While most of my interest that brought me here to APUG is analog, I do plenty of digital stuff and I have to admit this situation might be best approached with a "latest technology" method. The "127 film" caught my eye, as about a year ago a friend brought me a set of negatives believed to have been taken by his father-in-law during WWII military service. They looked to be 127, and while the basic strip of film was in far better shape than those you show (no alligator chomps!), there had been some stains and scrapes here and there from the stuff laying around poorly protected for 70+ years. He was hoping to wind up with some prints, as there was belief that his FIL was in some. So I figured to start by scanning them ("do no harm") and did so, doing a little tweaking to try to subdue some of the damage. At that point I made the scans accessible over the web and sent him a link, hoping to reduce the number of frames I needed to spend further time on.

Turns out, in one of the ones I felt was in the best condition, his FIL was one of several guys sitting on the barrel of a rather large howitzer. And my friend felt the scans printed (gasp!) digitally would be more than sufficient. As someone who has done some darkroom work in the past he appreciated that it could take a lot of work to not get anything much better. So that brought that project to a happy end. My friend's wife is one of five daughters who now have a picture of their dad as a youthful artilleryman (or whatever).

Just my unsolicited 1.3 (after tax) cents,

Touche' my friend.
I get your point 100%.
We are probably a bit caught up in the whole Nostalgia Thing.
Oddly enough, i do not have a scanner, and know anything about them. Taking my first Digital Class at my local college in August/September.
I believe my friend Did Scan these. We are just curious about making some darkroom prints from the Negs......just because, if you know what i mean.
He does not know the name Bob Carnie.....but he knows i Am NOT a Bob Carnie.
I will simply do the best i can with this challenge and see how it goes.

DWThomas · Jul 1, 2018

CMoore said:
[ . . . ] We are just curious about making some darkroom prints from the Negs......just because, if you know what i mean.

Ya, I well understand that, and if urged to I would have gone further in the case described. I can see if you don't have the scanner and utilities already sitting there what I suggested would be an intimidating effort. Regardless of the outcome it will no doubt be a learning experience that may prove useful in the future. I wish you the best in your efforts.

MattKing · Jul 1, 2018

John Salim said:
..... sorry.... to be clear I meant using masking tape on the glass and not the film itself.

John S

I would suggest use of re-usable tape on the glass and just into the non-emulsion side of the rebate of the negative.

127 film

CMoore

BAC1967

John Salim

guangong

MattKing

Moderator

CMoore

John Salim

CMoore

Sirius Glass

CMoore

John Salim

DWThomas

CMoore

CMoore

DWThomas

MattKing

Moderator

127 film

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency