Another 120 film ID help needed

[Paul Verizzo]

What a coincidence, that there is a thread on this topic just a few days ago. Unfortunately, it didn't help me.

So I came across an exposed roll of 120 film without any brand marking (why DO they not mark their brand?) The backing paper at this point is black with white lettering and numbering stating that the ISO is 125. The ISO letters are a standard serif font, but the numerals, especially the "2", is highly stylized.

In all likelihood I bought this film from Freestyle six or seven years ago, but that's not a 100% definite. The only 120 sized 125 speed film they even list anymore is FP4+. The fact that it is 125 and not 100 narrows things down, but from looking at the Kodak Plus-X and Ilford FP4 datasheets, this doesn't match the images of the rolls. So, what's left? I dabbled some with Fortepan back then, but they are ISO 100. I've never used Agfa, Rollei, or similar brands. An Arista house brand before the .EDU (Foma) series?

I did have some Verichrome Pan a decade ago, but I thought I sold it all in 2007. But maybe I had a roll in the Rollei and forgot about it? Pictures of VP on the internet show a red and yellow unexposed roll.

If someone doesn't nail this easily, I'll post a photo. How do I do that?

 

[Rick A]

Did you load the film into a reel so you can read the entire backing paper?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Did you load the film into a reel so you can read the entire backing paper?

Just did. No further clues. The unexposed backing uses black on white, instead of the white on black at the exposed end.

Further searching on both Google and Bing still only shows FP4 or Plux-X at ISO 125. Not even Verichrome Pan.

 

[gone]

Could be Ultrafine 125. In which case, I would not bother shooting it (unless you like frame numbers on your negs). Not sure if Freestyle ever sold it though.

 

[Rick A]

Both Kodak and Ilford print what film on both ends of the paper backing.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Both Kodak and Ilford print what film on both ends of the paper backing.

I know. I said so.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Could be Ultrafine 125. In which case, I would not bother shooting it (unless you like frame numbers on your negs). Not sure if Freestyle ever sold it though.

Now that's interesting, but I don't think ever bought any Ultrafine films, especially 120. The current 120 lineup is ISO 100 or 400.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Here is a photo of the roll in question.

I've never uploaded/attached an image, so bear with me.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

To answer the question as to why some 120 films do not indicate a brand. Many years ago companies like Agfa sold film intended for rebranding. For example Sears sold Agfa 120 film rebranded as their Tower brand. This way only the gummed paper tape on beginning and end of each roll need be reprinted and not the backing paper itself. However the example indicates a much newer film. But the overall purpose remains the same.

What I have done in the past when confronted with a mystery film is to develop it in a two bath developer like Diafine. Since all films are developed the same way there is no problem.

 

[MattKing]

It is my understanding that Ilford has stopped supplying 120 film with the film identifying information on the backing paper itself.

Something to do with the extraordinary high minimum order requirements of the backing paper supplier.

That information is included on the paper seals at the beginning and end ("Exposed") of the roll.

That being said, the roll in your picture doesn't look like any Ilford product I have ever seen.

Could it be from J & C?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

To answer the question as to why some 120 films do not indicate a brand. Many years ago companies like Agfa sold film intended for rebranding. For example Sears sold Agfa 120 film rebranded as their Tower brand. This way only the gummed paper tape on beginning and end of each roll need be reprinted and not the backing paper itself. However the example indicates a much newer film. But the overall purpose remains the same.

What I have done in the past when confronted with a mystery film is to develop it in a two bath developer like Diafine. Since all films are developed the same way there is no problem.

It strikes me that printing a different backing paper would be cheaper than making the boxes, data sheets, and foil pouches. Besides avoiding mis-processing, it's one more time to put the brand in front of the consumer.

If no one can ID this film (here????) I'm probably go a two bath route. Maybe try a wash after B and back into A again. I've never done that, might be a good time to try it.

 

[MattKing]

It strikes me that printing a different backing paper would be cheaper than making the boxes, data sheets, and foil pouches. Besides avoiding mis-processing, it's one more time to put the brand in front of the consumer.

If no one can ID this film (here????) I'm probably go a two bath route. Maybe try a wash after B and back into A again. I've never done that, might be a good time to try it.

Simon Galley of Harman/Ilford has posted here that it costs them more to buy the backing paper than it does to produce the roll of 120 film they use it with.

And the minimum order quantity is huge - enough to help make bringing back 220 film an economic non-starter.

 

[Xmas]

Rodinal 1:100 @20C 60 mins stand is ok for any mono...

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I've asked Freestyle for their help. Of course, they are still sawing logs on the Left Coast.

I will defer to Matt and Simon on the matter of a custom backing paper. I don't doubt the paper can be quite expensive, but we are only suggesting a different print job, one of which has to be done anyway.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The typical film user really doesn't need identification on the 120 backing paper. It only seems to be a problem for the very occasional roll found in a long unused camera. Hardly an incentive for manufacturers to go to the added expense.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Sherry at Freestyle says it is an Arista item that was FP4 in origin. Maybe like Kentmere is an off-badged Ilford. Freestyle has had several Arista lines over the years, so why not?

Since it sure as heck isn't a Kodak product, and there don't seem to be any other ISO 125 films out there in 120, I'll go with that.

 

[cmacd123]

Looks like the "English Profesional" stuff that freestyle used to sell. It was always assumed to be A private label version of FP4 (or perhaps Ilford PAN 100) At the time It did have it's own backing paper with (obviously) no brand name. I don't know if the same product was sold through other dealers in other parts of the world.

As a Private brand, Ilford will be unlikly to comment on it, other than to remind us that they don't make their own products available as private brands anymore.

Treat it as 20 to 30 year old FP4 and you should be fine.

 

[MattKing]

Kentmere isn't an "off brand Ilford" product.

Harman own Kentmere, and produce separate and distinct products under that brand. Just as they produce separate and distinct products using the Ilford brand.

They will also produce separate and distinct products under the "Verizzo" brand name, if you should choose to contract with them to do so, but they won't let you put that name on anything they produce for Ilford, Kentmere or other branding.

And by the way, the people that produce the backing paper are the ones who print it, so it is their minimum order requirements that make having separate versions for separate films.

I do wonder though, why it isn't possible to overprint something on the outside of each roll with something akin to a rubber stamp.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I do wonder though, why it isn't possible to overprint something on the outside of each roll with something akin to a rubber stamp.

Too labor intensive.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Looks like the "English Profesional" stuff that freestyle used to sell. It was always assumed to be A private label version of FP4 (or perhaps Ilford PAN 100) At the time It did have it's own backing paper with (obviously) no brand name. I don't know if the same product was sold through other dealers in other parts of the world.

As a Private brand, Ilford will be unlikly to comment on it, other than to remind us that they don't make their own products available as private brands anymore.

Treat it as 20 to 30 year old FP4 and you should be fine.

It's a heck of a lot newer than that, but I sure like your "English Professional" observation. Makes sense.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Kentmere isn't an "off brand Ilford" product.

Harman own Kentmere, and produce separate and distinct products under that brand. Just as they produce separate and distinct products using the Ilford brand.

They will also produce separate and distinct products under the "Verizzo" brand name, if you should choose to contract with them to do so, but they won't let you put that name on anything they produce for Ilford, Kentmere or other branding.

And by the way, the people that produce the backing paper are the ones who print it, so it is their minimum order requirements that make having separate versions for separate films.

I do wonder though, why it isn't possible to overprint something on the outside of each roll with something akin to a rubber stamp.

Didn't mean to denigrate Kentmere, but it's pretty well shown to be a line of film that Ilford/Haman/Whatevertoday markets into less wealthy countries.

Printing setup is cheap these days. And it just occurred to me, a private run does not need a different print job on the whole paper, just the adhesive strip that usually just says "Exposed." Or, "Process in D-76 for X minutes at X temperature." Would always point people in the right direction from there.

 

[cmacd123]

a private run does not need a different print job on the whole paper, just the adhesive strip that usually just says "Exposed." Or, "Process in D-76 for X minutes at X temperature."

this is also the same approach taken by Foma BTW. they use the same paper on all their private label stuff, and just print the stickers as "fomapan" Holga" "B+W Film" or "lomography" as needed.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

It strikes me that printing a different backing paper would be cheaper than making the boxes, data sheets, and foil pouches.

Only the boxes and the gummed label saying exposed need identify the particular film. The data sheet and foil package and everything else can all be generic.