Agfa Copex HDP 10...any thoughts?

Hatchetman · Oct 7, 2014

Spurred by a recent thread here on unperfed 35mm for use in 828 cameras, I bought a 100 ft roll of this, expired 2008. Initial results were quite disappointing. I rated at ISO 12, developed in DD-X (not sure what else to use). Took the development time down from 7 to 5 minutes looking to decrease contrast.

I would say most were way overexposed and unusable. Contrast was very high but in the less overexposed ones, there was potential there. But the strangest thing was that most were very blurry...which is the most puzzling aspect. The only thing I could think would be the film itself was not being held flat by the pressure plate, but I don't see how that is possible.

Could I have exposed the wrong side of the film? Anything? Anyone?

Gerald C Koch · Oct 7, 2014

I personally have not had any luck in fully taming the contrast of various microfilms. There are several developers that are intended to do this but you will have to mix your own or use one of the Spur developers made in Germany (VERY pricey). You could try POTA, Perfection XR-1, Burton, Collins, HW Control, TDLC-3, or others. The formulas are posted on APUG or can also be found on the web. Good luck, the problem is that these films are designed to be very contrasty and developers can only do so much to correct this.

Microfilm is designed to be exposed in a machine under restricted light conditions. The blurry images that you are seeing may be the lack of anti-halation coating that is common. Lack of this coating causes the image to "bloom" when the film is used for pictorial purposes particularly when over-exposed.

Microfilms have very little exposure latitude, essentially none. So you must be spot on with exposure. Bracket all exposures.

Athiril · Oct 7, 2014

I assume emulsion side inwards on the bulk roll. I haven't got mine yet still need to send it out from my reship account.

If you are unsure and can't tell by feel. Cut a snip of film off and take it into room light. Put a drop of developer of film on one side. If it is the emulsion side it will turn black after a little bit of time.

In regards to flatness hold down bulb exposure mode with the lens off and look at the film in the camera and put your finger to it you should be able to tell if it is flat.

Normal developers aren't right for this film. High sulphite probably doesn't work well with such small grain.

Gerald C Koch · Oct 7, 2014

Another source of 828 film is to built a film splitter and cut down conventional 120 film to size. In the past there have plans on how to do this on the web. This can also be used to make backing paper.

Athiril · Oct 7, 2014

This looks like a good starting point, it's 16mm HDP 13, but I'm sure they're the same film, just on a different thickness film base.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicholasmiddleton/14342411096

I'd try this formula here as well when mine arrives, probably modified a bit
http://photochemical.wordpress.com/

Hatchetman · Oct 7, 2014

This is very helpful. I am pretty sure there is no anti-halation layer, which may explain why the overexposed shots have this "bloom" while the underexposed shots do not. And I was using the old Sunny-16 rule, which on retrospect is not a good idea. But taking along a light meter kind of defeats the purpose of using an 828 camera.

RE: Developers. Expensive specialty developers are not an option. I CAN cut down 120 film and use normal developers. I use a cigar guillotine to cut the roll. Works OK. Buying expensive developers defeats my purpose, which is to find an easy, relatively inexpensive way to use my Bantam Special.

Athiril - let me know if you have any luck with that. I'd be curious to see.

Attached are some examples

Athiril · Oct 7, 2014

Microfilm developer is very cheap, if you DIY as the dilution is very weak compared to a normal develop, it uses little of anything.

What developers do you have on hand?

Did you use DD-X at it's normal 1+4? I'd try it again at 1+9 for the same time (5 min) with bracketed exposure, and see if it needs more diluting.

Hatchetman · Oct 7, 2014

At the moment I have D76, TMax, Ilfosol, and DD-X. I have one more roll made. I may shoot at ISO 50 and use a weaker developer solution.

Athiril · Oct 7, 2014

Just edited above to 1+9, as I meant twice as diluted. Bracket a few. I'd load a short roll and bracket it to find what looks most normal in density at that developer dilution and time. That'll tell you which direction to go in from there generally.

edit: Did some digging, this is made by Agfa, and sold under Kodak Imagelink HQ 2461, found far more examples with Imagelink HQ, and it really has incredible potential, plus it's panchromatic.

dynachrome · Oct 7, 2014

Is this verified? Did Kodak sell a microfilm stock made by Agfa? An inexpensive and reliable way to develop microfilms for pictorial use is to use Ilford Microphen 1:5. Some specialty developers may get you slightly more speed but using a lower ISO usually helps. By bracketing and taking careful notes you can get close enough with the films being discussed. Even with good technique you will see that the spectral sensitivity of microfilm does not always match that of general purpose panchromatic film. If I know I will need to make a large print I will shoot with a 6X7 camera on Kodak Ektar 100 or Fuji ACROS or Ilford Pan F+. These films will give me more speed than most microfilms and some lattitude.

Athiril · Oct 7, 2014

http://www.agfa.com/sp/global/en/internet/main/solutions/microfilm/index.jsp

"In order to assure long-term continuity at the highest possible quality standards AGFA transferred its worldwide distribution channels into the hands of Eastman Park Micrographics (EPM) who will sell the products manufactured by AGFA under their own brand IMAGELINK. This transfer took place on JUNE 3rd, 2013."

Gerald C Koch · Oct 7, 2014

An interesting developer. The hydroquinone monosufonate ion is a weak developing agent (much weaker than the parent hydroquinone). It is formed in such developers as D-76 as the developer is used and probably explains why people like replenished D-76. The potassium salt was used (and sold) by Kodak as part of the starter solution for several developers. It would be useful in taming the contrast of microfilms. Is the solution used full strength? My technical French was many years ago using the Marie Curie books. Since French was not her native language she wrote very simply.

ic-racer · Oct 7, 2014

I had few hundred feet of microfilm a few years ago. I went down to 18 degrees centigrade and was right at 4 minutes. I got some pretty good continuous tone negatives out of it. Here is an example print. I think I printed that on grade '0'.

Athiril · Oct 8, 2014

Here are some samples of Imagelink HQ from a particular user who has used a variety of different developers, his preference seems to be for H&W Control at ISO 50
https://www.flickr.com/search/?w=31156504@N03&q=imagelink

http://www.frugalphotographer.com/info-formulary-general.htm

Hatchetman · Oct 8, 2014

Athiril said:
Here are some samples of Imagelink HQ from a particular user who has used a variety of different developers, his preference seems to be for H&W Control at ISO 50
https://www.flickr.com/search/?w=31156504@N03&q=imagelink

http://www.frugalphotographer.com/info-formulary-general.htm

Looks like the stuff has potential!

Murray Kelly · Oct 8, 2014

Has been discussed at length on photo.net

http://photo.net/minox-camera-forum/00VpUe
http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00Y1wj?start=10

Page 2 of the second link

Jack Dong is using slow and faster Imagelink.

A common thread of these low contrast microfilm developers seems to be 1g/l of sodium thiocyanate. It's in the MSDS of SPUR developers, too

Athiril · Oct 8, 2014

1g/L sounds like a concentrate to me. Adotech II uses potassium thiocyanate iirc, but Adotech II is a concentrate, it gets diluted, it also uses some kind of ammonia source as well (you can smell it) which ever so lightly gives the smallest base fog, so that the film base isn't basically invisible, and can be used with automatic film feeding printers (like minilabs), and of course, probably boosts the shadow detail a bit.

Murray Kelly · Oct 9, 2014

And of course I meant potassium thiocyanate not the sodium salt.

Athiril · Oct 10, 2014

DHL estimates I'll have it by the end of Monday, so I should be able to do a test on Tuesday.

Ashfaque · Oct 10, 2014

I wanted to try either of the following microfilms - 214NXO7 & 114NXHU (both are 35mm). According to Dead Link Removed (representative of Imagelink in India):

... both were previously known as 'Agfa Copex HDP'. 'Agfa Copex Rapid' is a higher speed film used for low light conditions and has more tonal range & quality.

Somewhat related, could someone please let me know:
(1) whether I can use these non-perforated films on M mount cameras?
(2) if (1) is possible, is there any place (preferably within NA or EU countries) that sells fresh films at a lower quantity say 1-2 100 feet bulk rolls? Reason: the minimum buy from scanmicrofilm.com is 50 rolls!

Thanks for your time and help.

Best regards,

Ashfaque

Athiril · Oct 10, 2014

Ashfaque said:
I wanted to try either of the following microfilms - 214NXO7 & 114NXHU (both are 35mm). According to Dead Link Removed (representative of Imagelink in India):

Somewhat related, could someone please let me know:
(1) whether I can use these non-perforated films on M mount cameras?
(2) if (1) is possible, is there any place (preferably within NA or EU countries) that sells fresh films at a lower quantity say 1-2 100 feet bulk rolls? Reason: the minimum buy from scanmicrofilm.com is 50 rolls!

Thanks for your time and help.

Best regards,

Ashfaque

I bought mine using Reship.com (there's probably better more cost effective reshippers for the U.S.) via that ebay link.

Also you can buy Copex Rapid in the EU from macodirect.de by single roll. And possibly fotoimpex. Hans O. Mahn & Co are the supplier.

Hatchetman · Oct 10, 2014

This thread talks about using non-perforated film in a Leica M.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Ashfaque · Oct 10, 2014

(there was a url link here which no longer exists) & (there was a url link here which no longer exists): Thanks for your tips.

Athiril: I know about Maco. It's just that I have this itching of buying a bulk. I asked Maco Direct about bulk roll too and they don't sell them. Seems 3b6y is the best place to look for a non-perforated bulk roll now.

Hatchetman: Thanks for the link. Seems non-perforated films are not so compatible with Leica Ms. I'm guessing same applies for Voigtlander and Zeiss Ikon cameras as well.

Bests,

Ashfaque

Athiril · Oct 11, 2014

You could try Hans O. Mahn & Co, which are the business side of Macodirect iirc, its not bulk rolls, but you can get it cheaply from there, if you're in the EU it may not be a high minimum order.

http://www.maco-photo.de/photo.php

click commerce business

Athiril · Oct 14, 2014

Got my Copex, loaded up one roll, and put sticky tape around the drive spool facing outwards to grip the film and wind it.. seemed to work while I was winding on.. looks like it stopped winding once I closed the back, so need to try again.

Agfa Copex HDP 10...any thoughts?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency