Agfa Copex Pan from the 70s

[Gregory_Nolan]

My dad just gave me eight rolls of Agfa-Gevaert Copex Pan from the 1970s (see pictures). He had recieved them when he was at school and kept them unused ever since. As the film does not have sprocket holes, I could only use it (more or less) in my 6x12 pinhole camera (or maybe in the Hasselblad using an adapter?).

Do I read the print correctly - is this film 800 ISO / 30 E.I.?

Do you think they are worth a try? How would you develop them? I've got Rodinal and Ilford DD-X developers at home. Or should I just keep them as a paperweight or something?

Norbert

 

[trendland]

My dad just gave me eight rolls of Agfa-Gevaert Copex Pan from the 1970s (see pictures). He had recieved them when he was at school and kept them unused ever since. As the film does not have sprocket holes, I could only use it (more or less) in my 6x12 pinhole camera (or maybe in the Hasselblad using an adapter?).

Do I read the print correctly - is this film 800 ISO / 30 E.I.?

Do you think they are worth a try? How would you develop them? I've got Rodinal and Ilford DD-X developers at home. Or should I just keep them as a paperweight or something?

Norbert

Better not Gregory!
.....because I you will expose this film at EI 30 you will not have the right fun with your photographs!
E.I. on the box is. "1" I will repeat "E.I. = one" but it is obviously from the missing. "O".

Conclusions = E.I. 10 would be right if the film wouldn't have this expiration date.
So EI 3 - EI. 6 will come at it's best !

with regards

 

[trendland]

Have you made thoughts about developing method ? Are you familiar with that special Films?
You may have a look on a "Gigabit" issue via Google.
with greetings

 

[trendland]

Oh sorry "Gigabit" isn't helpfull - so google with "Gigabit Film".

with regards

 

[Murray Kelly]

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/h-w-control-developer-recipe.34934/

 

[AgX]

E.I. on the box is. "1" I will repeat "E.I. = one" but it is obviously from the missing. "O".

Conclusions = E.I. 10 would be right if the film wouldn't have this expiration date.

Was the term E.I. , Exposure Index already used around 1970 ??

Was the speed of such film stated on the box ??

I doubt both.

 

[trendland]

" Copex Pan " was the base of different manufacturers (is there a difference between that film Gigabit anounced with some stuff of Rollei ?)
I guess that "Pan" was just in use during the 70th - later "Rapid" looks better to Agfa?
Well I am not sure 100% - perhaps you are the better expert with discontinued Agfa Films.
But to me that "Copex" indicates "same emulsion" - nearly the same because there might have been
emulsion improvements between the midt 70th and the following years (might - but not must).

Indeed : Why we are talking of E.I. ? I can't remember - perhaps because OP asked about E.I. on the box.
I've looked again and can't find the mystique "one" = 1??? for a second time. What ever ISO 1 would be nonsense. But ISO 10 should be Ok....


So - OP your film should be marked with 10 ASA but we can't find that mark - glad to have the Name:

Agfa Copex - that's fine.

with regards

 

[trendland]

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/h-w-control-developer-recipe.34934/

Murray Kelly what you've shared from this post (I just had a look on it is realy helpfull)
1) Agfa Copex Pan - Agfa Copex Rapid is obviously the same (now it comes more clear ,[to 99,8%] ..…if there is any difference it should not effect the ISO class)
2) some recipes are interesting (I experimented with alternate developers years ago -some are out of the 30th , 50th with a total great number of different types - most have conception as 2bath,3bath developer for handle contrast via different dilution) .
That was in concern of high priced special developers (but low priced Films like ATO 2.0)

with regards

PS : That's all a bit more complicate (from developing) in concern of simle developing - and if it is the right think for the OP we can't say?
But with the right entusiasm : " EVERYTHING should be possible "...

 

[AgX]

" Copex Pan " was the base of different manufacturers (is there a difference between that film Gigabit anounced with some stuff of Rollei ?)

Gigabitfilm GTP and Rollei ATP were intended as the same film/developer combos. But Maco decided differently during negotiations and finally procured a developer from a different source. The film itself is not a microfilm.
I was not involved in this, but can tell you that behind the scenes things are no fun at all concerning business.

 

[trendland]

Gigabitfilm GTP and Rollei ATP were intended as the same film/developer combos. But Maco decided differently during negotiations and finally procured a developer from a different source. The film itself is not a microfilm.
I was not involved in this, but can tell you that behind the scenes things are no fun at all concerning business.

Understand, remember a short visit at Rollei years ago! I ordered the last full batch of a film for a special price. The People at Rollei I remember as extraordinary kind. Later it was quite clear !
They supposed I will come back every 2 weeks to follow with orders on other films in that scale!

But all Rollei bw Films are ok and real cheap. (meanwhile not as cheap as in the past) Looking at OP's
boxed film the reason is Agfa! What masses of masterrolls came on the market after bankropcy - crasy!

with regards

 

[E. von Hoegh]

This http: //www.labeauratoire.com/film/GevaertCopex/index.html is the closest I can come, Copex Rapid Pan from 1982.
Described as very high resolution microfilm.

 

[AgX]

Understand, remember a short visit at Rollei years ago!

But all Rollei bw Films are ok and real cheap. (meanwhile not as cheap as in the past)
Looking at OP's boxed film the reason is Agfa! What masses of masterrolls came on the market after bankropcy - crasy!

There were/are several Rolleis. You seemingly spoke with people of Maco. The only connerction of this firm with any Rollei firm was, that Maco got the brand Rollei licenced for the films they marketed. Before that those films had been branded Maco.

Yes, during the first phase of insolvency of AgfaPhoto they manufactured quite some films out of the material they had in stock. Most of them b&w. And Maco bought much of that. But under that Rollei brand films made by other manufacturers were sold too. And that insolvency production stock is gone long ago anyway.

 

[Alan Johnson]

My dad just gave me eight rolls of Agfa-Gevaert Copex Pan from the 1970s (see pictures). He had recieved them when he was at school and kept them unused ever since. As the film does not have sprocket holes, I could only use it (more or less) in my 6x12 pinhole camera (or maybe in the Hasselblad using an adapter?).

Do I read the print correctly - is this film 800 ISO / 30 E.I.?

Do you think they are worth a try? How would you develop them? I've got Rodinal and Ilford DD-X developers at home. Or should I just keep them as a paperweight or something?

Norbert

It may be similar to the present product:
https://www.macodirect.de/en/film/black-white-films/1398/agfa-copex-rapid-roll-film-120
I used to use Copex Rapid about 10 years ago when it was available in 35mm , It was microfilm type and although the least contrasty of this type it requires development in special developer or very dilute "ordinary" developer.There are plenty of choices if a search is made for "Agfa Copex Rapid developer" IMO it is worth a try, if it has been stored in cool conditions it may not be fogged.

 

[trendland]

It may be similar to the present product:
https://www.macodirect.de/en/film/black-white-films/1398/agfa-copex-rapid-roll-film-120
I used to use Copex Rapid about 10 years ago when it was available in 35mm , It was microfilm type and although the least contrasty of this type it requires development in special developer or very dilute "ordinary" developer.There are plenty of choices if a search is made for "Agfa Copex Rapid developer" IMO it is worth a try, if it has been stored in cool conditions it may not be fogged.

Alan - you may not belive but I also tryed with D76.......
Just as you mentioned "very dilute" - I remembered it.....!

with regard

PS : In normal use of D76 1+1/1+3 I started with 1 + 6/ 1 + 12 and with more dilution. The Problem is that D76 has a point of death ......and before D76 dies (short before D76 soul goes to the other side
) you get something like a ~ normal negative (with no good characteristics).
But there are many many other cheap alternates and of course the intended developers (you have to pay for).