C-22

[tjaded]

Hi all--
Has anyone here done anything with old C-22 film? I know there are a few places that will still do the C-22 process, but is there anything else that can be done? I think the high temps of E-6/C-41 would just mean ruining other people's film if I did that... Anyway, I have some rolls of GAF C-22 film that I got in a box of old photo stuff, not sure what to do with it.

Adios,
Matt

 

[Ole]

I'll be watching this thread with interest.

I know there's a company that processes C-22, but I'd prefer not to have to ship my 9x12cm film packs and 13x18cm glass plates abroad...

 

[Akki14]

I've developed a roll in B&W chemicals and got fairly good images off of it. Someone suggested speedibrew's celer-41 kit which can be used at room temperture but I haven't seen speedibrew's stuff being sold in the usual outlets so much so maybe they've stop producing their kits while I wasn't looking.

A few of the pictures I've printed from the rather dark unbleached colour negatives. The two of the same picture is just me fooling around with filters on the enlarger head to try to get the best possible image out of it. This was Mark VI film if I remember correctly and I surprisingly didn't have hassle getting it off the backing paper and onto the spool like I had feared. Not sure how much luck you'll have with 35mm as 35mm isn't quite as protected from aging as 120 is.

 

[AgX]

From my understanding you either have to

-)make your own C-22 chemistry
-)modifiy RA-4 chemistry (which might be the same effort)
-)as said, send it to a specialized lab
-)as said, run a b&w process.

 

[pentaxuser]

You'll see that Akkki14 mentions Speedibrew's Celer-41 kit. Both Silverprint and RK photographic(both sponsors) still seem to stock this kit.

Given that you're in S Francisco, this info may not be of much use to you but you may want to check out either stockist. The maker of Celer-41 Michael Maunder simply says that he cannot give guarantees of quality due to age of the C-22 but it's worth processing in this kit which works at room temp of 20C and also at normal C-41 temp.

I can say that Celer-41 works well for C-41 at normal C-41 temp but I have never used it for C-22. However if Michael Maunder says that it works then you can bet he has tried it and it does.

pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

Somewhere at Apug PE stated that C-41 and C-22 differ in all ingredients with the exception of the stabilizer (which meanwhile changed too).

If someone should want to give C-41 a try to process C-22 films, I don't see why in such a case with so much uncertainty one should not try any C-41 developer at hand at low temperature and prolonged developing time.

Just cut up the film in some pieces and give them a try in several rounds.

 

[srs5694]

Another low-temperature C-41 developer is (there was a url link here which no longer exists) which is a divided developer intended to be used at 75F. I've used it on C-41 film and it produces variable results -- sometimes it seems OK, sometimes it produces odd results (mostly thin negatives). Thus, I wouldn't recommend it for C-41 films generally, and I've never tried it with C-22, so I certainly wouldn't recommend it if you need to get good results from C-22 films; however, if you want something to play with, I suppose it's worth a try. Note that NCF-41 is a mix-it-yourself formula, so you'll need a supply of ingredients -- CD-4, sodium sulfite, potassium carbonate, etc.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ok, here it is..... again!

C-22 films contained couplers that needed CD3 to form the right dyes, and ferricyanide bleach to oxidize them to their proper dye forms. Therefore, NO C-41 process will yield proper colors with C-22 films.

For those technically inclined, the C-22 films used 4 equivalent couplers which formed leuco (colorless) dyes in the developer and then used the bleach to oxidize them to their proper color. C-41 uses 2 equivanlent couplers to form all of the dyes in the developer.

In addition, due to age, the C-22 films will be foggy and would image poorly at best.

C-22 films required benzyl alcohol in the developer to allow proper coupling to take place. IDK what CD-4 would do in the C41 process, but it probably would not be suitable.

And, C-22 films were also very very soft and required a hardener in the process. Chances are that the film would reticulate even at the 75 deg process you might use unless you used the hardener from C-22.

PE

 

[Ole]

Thanks PE - Ilfotec HC it is, then. Or indeed any other B&W process. At least for the plates, I might decide to send that packfilm to the last lab on earth...

 

[dsullivan]

Thanks PE - Ilfotec HC it is, then. Or indeed any other B&W process. At least for the plates, I might decide to send that packfilm to the last lab on earth...

I know of at least two, in the US there's Rocky Mountain Film and in the UK there's processc22 and I think there's a couple of others as well, IIRC all of them develop C22 films as Black and White.

edit: Oh, and none of them are cheap.

David.

 

[Ole]

Process-C22 in the UK will develop C-22 films in real C-22 process, as colour negatives. But £15 per film makes developing a packfilm horrendously expensive. Getting the chemicals to do C-22 at home would most likely cost far less!

 

[donbga]

Anyway, I have some rolls of GAF C-22 film that I got in a box of old photo stuff, not sure what to do with it.

Adios,
Matt

Throw it in the trash or put it on a shelf as an antique. Processing old C-22 film is a waste of time and money unless there are photos of historical or personal importance on the rolls.

If the rolls are unexposed, the film is foged beyond use. It's probably been about 35 years since C-22 film was produced.

 

[AgX]

There is also:

http://www.rockymountainfilm.com

and probably a German lab which address I have not at hand at the moment.

 

[dsullivan]

Throw it in the trash or put it on a shelf as an antique. Processing old C-22 film is a waste of time and money unless there are photos of historical or personal importance on the rolls.

If the rolls are unexposed, the film is foged beyond use. It's probably been about 35 years since C-22 film was produced.

Well, you never what interesting subject might be on there, Akki14 and myself received the C-22 roll with a 50p eBay camera purchase, we developed it in Diafine to see if anything would come out which basically cost us nothing and got some interesting if degraded images.

We've left the roll uncut because we're still considering if we can process it any further.

David.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I think I have a full kit, but the developer has spoiled.

If it is here, anyone interested? Cost - shipping only. All it needs is 5 grams / liter of CD-3 to be added and the developer bottle cannot be used.

PE

 

[AgX]

Akki, David,

As the couplers will still be in their globuli, I guess you still have all choices with that film.

 

[Akki14]

Akki, David,

As the couplers will still be in their globuli, I guess you still have all choices with that film.

Yes but we're a little worried about losing what images we have as we seem to have quite good ones.

The very odd thing about the images I posted from that film is that the film format doesn't match up with the camera. Camera we bought shoots 6x6 the roll of film is 4x4 which is actually to our advantage quite a bit because it means the very worse fogging on the edges isn't really hitting the images themselves. Still seems like the photographer didn't know about, or overcompensated for, parallax error. We estimate that the roll we developed (4minutes in solution A of diafine and 4 minutes in solution b) was taken in the late 70s. We have developed another roll of c-22 a little older than that. We got images of a sort out of it that appear to be 6x9cm format but they look very wonky. As far as I can tell, it looks like the camera was taking a jaunty angle photo of a lightbulb and the exposure wasn't right at all anyway. So yes, the images might not be worth $30/15GBP to get processed properly and wait 6-12months to get back, but if you have normal B&W chemicals, you can develop it very easily and get images off of it.

The only upsetting thing I've found is that I'm unable to locate the original owner of this film that has images of what looks like a first communion on it; the online auction guy we bought it from bought it at another auction years ago apparently. Oh and the comment on this thread saying throw it out! If anyone here is going to do that, they can post it to me to have processed as B&W as I find these things interesting.

 

[AgX]

You might know, there is someone in the US busy with images he found in old cameras he bought:

http://westfordcomp.com/updated/found.htm