35mm B&W film with no manufacturer's markings?

Richard Man · Nov 5, 2017

Google search fails me so...

Re-scanning my 2011 negatives (just got a Pakon working so now I can bulk scan all the negs) and I notice that some do not have manufacturer's marking. I mostly shoot/shot Tri-X and the Freestyle branded Tri-X (Arista Premium) and both of those have markings. It's a while ago, so I don't remember what film it could have been, I do use HP5+, Acros etc. sometimes but I seem to recall that they have the data.

The frame numbers are very clearly defined. So the manufacturer data is not washed off or anything like that. Besides the normal frame numbers, they also have "--> #A" where # is the frame number at the bottom edge as well.

Any idea or is it anyone's guess?

Thanks

Mick Fagan · Nov 5, 2017

Twice I have had HP5 bulk film with defective manufacturers marking. Once I had frame numbers missing, another time the film was completely blank. This was in the 80's.

Ilford Australia (which no longer exists) at first, were quite unconvinced, to say the least. Once I showed them some developed film they became more interested. They then took a small sample of unexposed film from my bulk loader for testing. A few days later they were back and offered to take all of my bulk film and replace it with fresh bulk film.

I tended to think it was surveillance film that somehow ended up as retail film.

Mick.

pentaxuser · Nov 5, 2017

Mick Fagan said:
I tended to think it was surveillance film that somehow ended up as retail film.

Mick.

Congratulations, Mick, you've handed the conspiracy theorists an early Christmas present. I can see this thread now running all the way to the White House.

Even some 30+ years later there might be a simple explanation but I see no reason why we should settle for that even if we had any chance of getting it.

pentaxuser

MattKing · Nov 5, 2017

Back in the day, Ilford would make film to be used as "house brands" for others. That would require customizing the edge print.
Someone may have been asleep at the switch when this film went through the edge printer. It may even have been sold at a special sale price for that vary reason.

Richard Man · Nov 5, 2017

I don't believe in conspiracy theories ;-)
OK, I have many rolls with no manufacturer markings. Again, the frame numbers are clearly visible.

The images definitely seem flatter and more underexposed than the Arista Premium 400 (Tri-X) that are in the mix. You can see it clearly.
The Arista Premium is the least inexpensive film I usually buy.

I have tried things like Foma and "lesser known" brands but there are too many rolls of it. Usually if I try a new emulsion, I would start with just 2-3 rolls.

Mystery!

gorbas · Nov 5, 2017

Arista EDU branded Foma in bulk 35mm roll did not have any markings

Richard Man · Nov 5, 2017

gorbas said:
Arista EDU branded Foma in bulk 35mm roll did not have any markings

I haven't rolled my own for 20+ years.... but may be it's pointing to some house-branded rolls from lesser known manufacturers. I do buy lots of stuff from Freestyle so... something like that is probably the best explanation. Thanks!

Richard Man · Nov 6, 2017

OK, empirical evidence says that they are probably Neopan 1600. I probably didn't process them well in 2011. The same film done a few months ago look much better (and shows no manufacturer's markings)

trendland · Nov 6, 2017

pentaxuser said:
Congratulations, Mick, you've handed the conspiracy theorists an early Christmas present. I can see this thread now running all the way to the White House.
Sorry but a conspiracy theory is a total different issue.It shal work in the near of this way : My edge markings of all films are gone.So manufacturers were forced from Aliens to mark films with strongly confidentional technology.So Aliens are able to let them go.It has obviously to do with the Kennedy Assassination.
Because of ABRAHAM ZAPRUDA was the last man on earth with conventionally ordinary markings on film.
Therefore Aliens would not allowe it again - in addition they are able to fog any film to any time...
This is a conspiracy theory pentaxuser.

May be you mix simple questions to technical issues with conspiracy theorys?
Even a little guess / speculation on unidentyfied issues with films is just a way to advance in the direction of possible reasons (just from my point of view).Obviously you may see this different.
But a conspiracy theory is total different because of the strange missing of any logic. From the example above : Why is the missing of edge markings a concern to A.Zapruda and Kennedy?
Here it was ask for the reason to missing markings and possible answers are given in direction of bulk manufacturing concerns.
Is this a conspiracy theory to you ?
Realy? ......

with regards

PS : Some of my films are also without markings - but I don't care about.To the
time I used this films I possible have known from what manufacturers they are. Today I can't remember for sure.

BUT A SIMPLE QUESTION TO SUCH KIND OF ISSUE HAVE TO BE ALOWED I MUST STATE.

Richard Man · Nov 6, 2017

And just to finish off, I did find later rolls from the same year that were much better processed so possibly even I learned from my mistakes then For the record, I shot 83 rolls of 35mm that year, all of them XPan format... It was a good year I have images ranging from Yosemite to Occupy Wall Street...

As for the value of this thread: as I could not find anything on the web that says "yea, some B&W film are unmarked" (perhaps my google-fu is too weak), this alone will now hopefully answer that question when the next person gets curious.

trendland · Nov 6, 2017

Richard Man said:
And just to finish off, I did find later rolls from the same year that were much better processed so possibly even I learned from my mistakes then For the record, I shot 83 rolls of 35mm that year, all of them XPan format... It was a good year I have images ranging from Yosemite to Occupy Wall Street...

As for the value of this thread: as I could not find anything on the web that says "yea, some B&W film are unmarked" (perhaps my google-fu is too weak), this alone will now hopefully answer that question when the next person gets curious.

Richard Man - 83 rolls of bw film a year
(with or without edge markings) is a quite
good rating.
I just remember nearly 200 E6 films one year.But since this I didn't count again.
And with todays pricing I am missing a "rebuy" strategy from myself.
Digital Shooting or bankrobery are both no options to me.
I also can't say witch of both is more bad?
But I guess Digital Shooting

with regards

Richard Man · Nov 6, 2017

I am now averaging 300+ sheets of 4x5 each year but that's because I am doing 3+ portrait projects. I expect that to ramp down next year.... I don't make money with my photography (say... who does? ) so yes it's a struggle. I enjoy using my (film) cameras though so there it goes...

trendland · Nov 6, 2017

Richard Man said:
I am now averaging 300+ sheets of 4x5 each year but that's because I am doing 3+ portrait projects. I expect that to ramp down next year.... I don't make money with my photography (say... who does? ) so yes it's a struggle. I enjoy using my (film) cameras though so there it goes...

Well some lucky guys indeed make money with photography.The
last one I was a friend of his fashion shots was "Emmet Malmstrom".
But he still died last year at young age.

35mm B&W film with no manufacturer's markings?

Richard Man

Mick Fagan

pentaxuser

MattKing

Moderator

Richard Man

gorbas

Richard Man

Richard Man

trendland

Richard Man

trendland

Richard Man

trendland

Attachments

35mm B&W film with no manufacturer's markings?

Moderator

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency